Gotong Royong Working Together - WUR

Gotong RoyongWorking Together

Transformative landscape based design with kampung

communities in West-Java, Indonesia

Thomas van den Berg and Hanshu Liu

Major Thesis Landscape ArchitectureWageningen, August 2014

Wageningen University and Research CentreMaster Landscape Architecture & Spatial Planning

[LAR-80436]

Colophon© Wageningen University, 2014

Thomas van den Berg Registration number: [email protected]

Hanshu LiuRegistration number: [email protected]

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written permission of either the authors or the Wageningen University Landscape Architecture Chairgroup.

This publication is written as a final master thesis in landscape architecture by order of the chairgroup of landscape architec-ture at Wageningen University.

Chairgroup landscape architecturePhone: +31 317 484 056Fax: +31 317 482 166E-mail: [email protected]

Postal addressPostbus 476700 AA, WageningenThe Netherlands

Visiting addressGaia (building no. 101)Droevendaalsesteeg 36708 BP, WageningenThe Netherlands

In collaboration with and supported by:

Examiners

Supervisor and examiner:

Dr. Ir. Ingrid Duchhart [WUR]

............................................................................................................. signature date

Examiner:

Ir. Annet Kempenaar [WUR]

............................................................................................................. signature date

Examiner:

Prof. Dr. Ir. Adri van den Brink [WUR]

............................................................................................................. signature date

Preface

This report is the result of our master thesis project in Pun-cak, Indonesia. We, Thomas van den Berg and Hanshu Liu, are proud to present the final product to our readers. For eight months we have been working on this study which attempts to develop a participatory environmental planning method to help Kampung communities to sustainably develop. This research has been done as part of acquiring the Master degree (MSc) in Landscape Architecture at Wageningen University.

This research starts with our fascination for mega-urbanization in deltas in South-East Asia. Due to rapid land use change the environment is degrading. On the peripheries of the expanding cities lies the tension between urban and rural transformations. This is reflected in the way local communities treat the envi-ronment. By engaging them in a participatory environmental planning process we aim to make them feel responsible for their living environment. The Indonesian Diaspora Network welcomed our research proposal and they helped us to get in touch with the Agricultural University of Bogor (IPB). We got the opportunity to contribute to their community based devel-opment program in Puncak. Together with the local NGO Cili-wung Institute we designed a transformative workshop method that empowered the participants to improve their living envi-ronment. As landscape architects we could relate local process-es to regional understanding and provide recommendations and inspiration through our designs. It has been a really pleasant ex-perience to be able to work with such wonderful people. There-fore we would like to show our gratitude towards the people we met along this delightful journey.

Ingrid Duchhart, our supervisor for this thesis, has been of un-deniable importance to this project. Her deep knowledge and experience on the topic helped to spark our enthusiasm time and time again. Thank you sincerely for the pleasant collabo-ration.

Wiwi Tjiook, as our external supervisor we could not done this project without you. Thank you for sharing your in-depth knowledge about Indonesia and your experience in the field of landscape architecture.

Arief Rahmann of the Community Based Development re-search unit of IPB, we would like to thank you for your trust in our approach and for welcoming us to Indonesia.

Yuni Salma of the IPB landscape architecture group for sharing stories about landscape architecture in Indonesia and for help-ing us set up a great team of facilitators.

Tedja Kusumah, leader of Ciliwung Institute, your ambition to save Puncak is incredibly inspiring to us. You have a very warm

soul and we greatly enjoyed working together with you. Please take care of your wonderful team of people, with special re-gards to Asun and Hari.

Special thanks go out to Amin, Fia, Agusman, Eric and Nin-is, the facilitators of the participatory environmental planning workshop. Your contribution to this project proved to be of in-dispensable value. Thank you for your enthusiasm and working together with us.

The people of IPB, Pak Ernan, Uti and Musli, thank you for your help on site and the teachings on Indonesian culture. We really appreciate all your efforts in helping us conducting our research.

Dick Legger and Cora van Oosten, we would like to thank you for your expert knowledge on the natural and social side of our topic. Thank you for your time and the inspiring talks.

Esther Bergstra and Hanneke Schavemakers, research assis-tants at the chairgroup of Landscape Architecture, thank you for sharing your experience on the Green Towns approach and your valuable advice in general.

The people of Indonesian Diaspora Network, Daliana, Ebith, Yanti, Pauline for helping us build a network in Indonesia and for inspiring us through all your wonderful projects.

And last but not least we would like to give a big thank you out to the great people of Kampung Gunung Mas. You achieved great amounts of work in such a short time by working togeth-er. You can be proud of yourselves and we cannot wait to see your environment development plan become a reality. Keep up the good work!

To end in Bahasa Indonesia; terima kasih banyak semua orang untuk membantu Anda!

Readers guide

This report is concisely written and not intended as an extensive elaboration. For an in-depth look at our work we recommend the appendix CD-ROM in which we included a large collection of photos, workshop materials, and workshop results.The report is written as a summary of the conducted research.

Audience

This thesis report is written for several audiences at once. The institutions we address are listed below together with the pur-pose this study serves for this audience.

Chairgroup of Landscape Architecture - Wageningen Uni-versity. This study serves as an example how the Green Towns approach by Ingrid Duchhart can be adopted to Indonesia. The underlying research methodology is examined, adopted and im-proved to a transformative landscape based design model. This model serves as an example or inspiration for future research and makes an addition to the body of knowledge of landscape architecture with a focus on the developing world.

Indonesian Diaspora Network – Taskforce Liveable Cities – Ms. W. Tjiook. This study aims to be of addition to the projects of the Taskforce Liveable Cities. We aim to provide new per-spectives on community participation in environmental plan-ning in Indonesia.

IPB Community Development program. The current pro-gram of IPB does not include a landscape based design ap-proach. The present study therefore aims to shed new light on the methods of IPB in community based development projects.

NGO Ciliwung Institute. The NGO has wide experience and local knowledge although they did not try a landscape based design approach before. This study aims to provide an array of integrated spatial solutions that can inspire the NGO in their mission to save Puncak.

Kampung Gunung Mas – This is the community that under-went this experiment and came out stronger as a community and as spatial planners. The study aims to give new ideas for spatial solutions that help the community to continue realizing their desired future environment.

AbstractIncreasing mega-urbanization in the Jakarta Metropolitan Area (JMA) causes frictions in the environment of fringe areas. Puncak, is considered as a conservation zone in the upstream of the Jakarta delta, however, as fringe area of JMA the local communities are under pressure of environmental degradation. Environmental problems such as excessive garbage dumping, illegal logging and unsustainable tourism are occurring. The Agricultural University of Bogor (IPB) and local NGO Ciliwung Institute, audiences of this thesis, are working in Puncak with their local experience on Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) projects. This thesis proposes to further develop visual methods in the Green Towns approach, which connects the landscape-based design approach to PRA. As the PRA projects of IPB and the landscape-based design approach in the local context is not incorporate yet, the case of environmental degradation in Puncak provides an excellent pilot to try to integrate these methods. The research question is:

How can a landscape-based design approach help local Kampung communities in Puncak to come to integrat-ed spatial solutions to local environmental problems?

To answer this question, different methods were executed in both the Netherlands and Indonesia. By taking field walks, having open-ended talks, observations, photo and sketch studies, landscape analysis helps to get an impression of the relationship between human and nature of the study area. The participatory workshops include the proven Green Towns workshop of Duchhart, Photoshop workshop developed by Bergstra and Hornman, and Timeline workshop. The workshops provide local knowledge and knowledge ownership for different audiences. The Green Towns workshop and Photoshop workshop were not sufficient for preceding to long-term environment development actions. Therefore, Timeline workshop was organized, which leads to the afterwards actions continuing.

The data collected in Puncak were analysis and were used as input for the landscape plan. The landscape plan provides design principles and recommendations for applicable future actions instead of blueprint design. Additional researches were conducted in order to formulate comprehensive design principles on economic, social-cultural and environmental perspectives. The integrated spatial solutions as proposed by the participants are represented by five main landscape design principles: reusing of garbage, composting, multi-functional open spaces, terrace, planting trees. The answers to the research question are both methodological and physi-cal.

Abstract - BahasaMeningkatkan mega-urbanisasi di Jakarta Metropolitan Area (JMA) menyebabkan friksi di lingkungan daerah pinggiran. Puncak, dianggap sebagai zona konservasi di hulu Jakarta delta, namun, seperti pinggiran daerah JMA masyarakat lokal berada di bawah tekanan dari degradasi lingkungan. Masalah lingkungan seperti sampah yang berlebihan dumping, pembalakan liar dan pariwisata berkelanjutan yang terjadi. The Agricultural Universi-ty of Bogor (IPB) dan LSM lokal Ciliwung Institute, penonton tesis ini, bekerja di Puncak dengan pengalaman lokal mereka pada proyek-proyek Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA). Tesis ini mengusulkan untuk mengem-bangkan metode visual dalam pendekatan Hijau Kota, yang menghubungkan pendekatan desain berbasis lansekap ke PRA. Sebagai proyek PRA IPB dan pendekatan desain berbasis lansekap dalam konteks lokal tidak memasukkan lagi, kasus kerusakan lingkungan di Puncak memberikan pilot yang sangat baik untuk mencoba untuk mengintegrasikan metode ini. Pertanyaan penelitian adalah:

Bagaimana pendekatan berbasis desain lansekap dapat membantu masyarakat Kampung setempat di Puncak untuk datang ke solusi spasial terpadu untuk masalah lingkungan lokal?

Untuk menjawab pertanyaan ini, metode yang berbeda dieksekusi baik di Belanda dan Indonesia. Dengan mengambil lapangan berjalan, memiliki terbuka pembicaraan, observasi, dan studi foto sketsa, analisis lanskap membantu untuk mendapatkan kesan tentang hubungan antara manusia dan alam dari daerah studi. Lokakarya partisipatif meliputi terbukti Hijau Kota lokakarya dari Duchhart, Photoshop lokakarya dikembangkan oleh Bergstra dan Hornman, dan lokakarya Timeline. Lokakarya memberikan pengetahuan lokal dan kepemilikan pengetahuan untuk audiens yang berbeda. The Green Kota lokakarya dan Photoshop lokakarya tidak cukup untuk sebelumnya untuk kegiatan pembangunan lingkungan jangka panjang. Oleh karena itu, Timeline lokakar-ya diselenggarakan, yang mengarah ke tindakan setelah itu melanjutkan.

Data yang dikumpulkan di Puncak adalah analisis dan digunakan sebagai masukan untuk rencana lanskap. Rencana lanskap memberikan prinsip-prinsip desain dan rekomendasi untuk tindakan masa depan yang ber-laku bukannya desain cetak biru. Penelitian tambahan dilakukan untuk merumuskan prinsip-prinsip desain yang komprehensif tentang perspektif ekonomi, sosial-budaya dan lingkungan. Solusi spasial terpadu seperti yang diusulkan oleh para peserta yang diwakili oleh lima prinsip desain lansekap utama: menggunakan kembali sampah, pembuatan kompos, ruang terbuka multi-fungsional, teras, menanam pohon. Jawaban atas pertanyaan penelitian keduanya metodologis dan fisik.

1 Fascination 1.1 Mega-urbanization of Asian cities 1.2 Introduction to Indonesia 1.3 History of Jakarta and urban development 1.4 Decentralization 1.5 Urbanization: Environmental problems 1.6 Findings

2 Theoretical framework 2.1 The field of landscape architecture 2.2 Need for participation 2.3 Visual methods as a tool

2.4 Findings

3 Problem framework 3.1 Connecting theories and forming the knowledge gap 3.2 Research significance and knowledge gap for collaboration partners 3.3 Problem statement 3.4 Main research question 3.5 Findings

4 Research design 4.1 Introduction 4.2 Philosophical assumptions 4.3 Theoretical lens 4.4 Transformative research design 4.5 Relation between research and design 4.6 Design as synthesis 4.7 Limitations 4.8 Participatory environmental planning: The Green Towns Project 4.9 Case selection and institutional embedding 4.10 Role of researchers and participants 4.11 Data collection process 4.12 Findings

5 Landscape analysis 5.1 Jakarta Metropolitan Area 5.2 Puncak scale 5.3 Kampung scale

5.4 Findings

6 Participatory environmental planning 6.1 Introduction 6.2 Other workshops 6.3 Facilitators training 6.4 Adaptations 6.5 PEP Workshop-day1 6.6 PEP Workshop-day2 6.7 PEP Workshop-day3 6.8 Photoshop workshop 6.9 Timeline workshop 6.10 Other activities 6.11 Findings

Table of content

1222355

68111213

141616171717

18202020212222232323233031

687070737478849098102106107

3234364666

7 Translation

8 Design 8.1 Design process 8.2 Research for design outcomes 8.3 Design principles 8.4 Design strategy 8.5 Detail designs 8.6 Design implementation in time frame 8.7 Conclusin

9 Conclusion&discussion 9.1 Conclusion 9.2 Discussion

References

List of figures

Digital appendix

109

113114114115132134147147

152154160

164

168

171

1. Fascination

Gotong Royong - Working together

2

1.2 Introduction to IndonesiaIndonesia consists of 17,508 islands and has a pop-ulation of 238 million people. Java is the most pop-ulous island in the world and is home to 57% of Indonesia’s population. Approximately 45% of the population is ethnically Javanese. West-Java is the destination of mass migration of people hoping to

find financial prosperity. This results in a high popu-lation density of 1,400/km2. The Jakarta Metropoli-tan Area (JMA) consists of only 0.33% of the coun-try’s land area yet it is home to 12% of the national population i.e. 29 million people. The JMA is in a vast process of urbanization caused by domestic and direct foreign investment and produces 25% of In-

donesia’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (Firman, 2009). The present study lays emphasis on the envi-ronmental problems caused by the urbanization of the JMA. Uncontrolled urbanization of the JMA can be partly explained by giving a short history of its urban development (Steinberg, 2007).

1.3 History of Jakarta and urban development Indonesia was a colony of the Netherlands from 1602 until 1945. In 1617 the Dutch colonists start-ed to look for a base in Java and they got interested in Jayakarta (the former name of Jakarta, meaning ‘victorious’ after the won battle against Portuguse in-vaders). At this location the Dutch built the city of

Figure 1.1 Jakarta Metropolitan Area urbanization from year 1983 to 2005

Chapter 1: Fascination

1. Fascination

1.1 Mega-urbanization of South-East Asian deltas The context of this thesis is the uprising phenome-non of mega-urbanization in deltas in South-East Asia and related environmental problems. Mega-ur-banization can be defined as “the physical growth of cities which extends beyond metropolitan and city boundaries, and radiates from city centres in all directions” (Firman, Surbakti, Idroes, & Simarma-ta, 2011, p. 327). The mega-urbanization process in South-East Asia shows itself by increasing direct foreign investment, development of settlements and infrastructure networks and the increasing commer-cialization of agricultural production (Mawdsley, 2009; Mc Gee, 2011; McGee & Robinson, 1995). Mega-urban regions in Asia, however, in many ways seem to be largely disconnected from local economic activities and produce a little in terms of impacts on development for local population, which in turn has resulted in regional disparities (Brockerhoff, 2000; Mc Gee, 2011; UNCHS, 1996)

Another uprising global issue is climate hazards. Due to temperature rise, rainfall and therefore floods be-come more intense and frequent (Easterling et al., 2000). The deltas of South-East Asia are vulner-able to climate change and sea-level rise that could increase the frequency and level of inundation due to storm surges and floods from river drainage (Nicholls, 2004; Woodroffe et al., 2006). This is likely to put communities, biodiversity and infrastructure at risk of being severely damaged (Fuchs, 2010; Yuen & Kong, 2009).

The present study aims to examine mega-urbaniza-tion within the context of Indonesia’s recent social and economic development and political conditions. Down this report it becomes clear that this is espe-cially important to understand for cases in Indonesia, as the type of institutionalization has great influence on to what extent cross-boundary environmental problems are addressed (Firman et al., 2011).


3

Batavia. Cultural buildings such as churches, courts and town halls got introduced. Business went well in Indonesia and Batavia expanded southwards. By the end of the 19th century Batavia had developed itself with many subcentres scattered alongside main roads on the north-south axis. Many informal settlements

i.e. Kampungs established in the fringe areas of these subcentres. The Kampungs were inhabited by poor native people (Clarke, 1985).After independence in 1945 the city of Batavia was re-named in Jakarta. Indonesia’s first President Sukarno established the Master Plan of Jakarta (1965-1985). In this spatial plan Jakarta included the satellite towns of Bogor, Depok, Tangerang and Bekasi. Nowadays this metropolitan cluster is known as Jabodetabek i.e. Jakarta Metropolitan Area (JMA). However, politi-cal disorder after independence made implementa-tion hardly manageable. It was projected to develop

Figure 1.2 Flooding of Jakarta’s canals and river system

Chapter 1: Fascination

the JMA into a metropolitan agglomeration of 13 million inhabitants. Urbanization rate turned out to be much higher and the plan got revisited (Clarke, 1985). At the end of the 20th century the new Gov-ernor of Jakarta developed a new Master Plan for the JMA (1985-2005). Unfortunately the plan provided

different income groups with different infrastructure and environmental standards. This triggered further political disorder and divided Indonesian society (Firman, 2002).

1.4 Decentralization At that time Indonesia underwent a great fiscal de-centralization. This was a result of the economic cri-sis of 1997-1998. Decentralization is defined as ‘a


4

transfer of a significant degree of responsibility and authority for public revenues and expenditures from the central government to the local government un-der the principle of as much as autonomy as possible and as much as central power as necessary’ (Firman, 2009, p. 335). Frietzen and Lim (2006) state that in general decentralization is expected to improve levels of public participation and sensitivity to local needs. It is believed that decentralization may be effective to empower the most disadvantaged parts of civil society.

Decentralization in Indonesia was needed to provide equal infrastructure and public services for urban and regional development. Thus far the central gov-ernment did not meet the local needs in a balanced way (Firman, 2002). Unfortunately the decentraliza-tion turned out as a deception when the central gov-ernment continued to make decisions at the top lev-el. The Kabupaten and Kota (municipality and city levels) were supposed to only implement the deci-sions made by the central government. This spurred many local government officials to get involved in corruption and bribery. Local governments are in a condition of euphoria, considering their region as a ‘kingdom’. Available resources are recognized by lo-

cal governors as private possessions, instead of using them for development purposes (Firman, 2009). As Buehler (2010) states, it seems that the decentraliza-tion has neglected the local communities that so des-perately need it.

The effects of decentralization are visible in the land-scape of the JMA. After land got privatized and lo-cal governments gained responsibility for their local spatial plans, uncontrolled urbanization became in-evitable. The available land was a great opportunity for private developers and investors. As mentioned above local government officials were easy to accept bribes. Once the permits are given, the developer is allowed to alternate the land according to his wish-es. The former local landowners are often unfairly compensated for the loss of land (Firman, 2009). As a result the centre of Jakarta now has a dominantly commercial land use, instead of the previously pro-posed mixed use. Another example is the amount of green space in the JMA which decreased dramatically (from 40% in 1985 to 9% in 2002). Overall, the de-centralization and privatizing of land lead to spatial segregation. Which means that in Indonesia upper and middle-class build private housing environment to pursue an exclusive lifestyle and security, at the

Table 1.1 Land-use conversion in the area of Bogor-Puncak-Cianjur(Bopunjur) and Bandung Metrolitan Area (BMA), 1994-2001 (in ha).


5

expense of low-class communities (Firman, 2004). Hence in reality it turned out that decentralization, which was intended to democratize the urban plan-ning process, divided Indonesian society even further (Steinberg, 2007).

1.5 Urbanization: Environmental problems Uncontrolled urbanization has resulted in many en-vironmental problems in the JMA. Problems include traffic congestion resulting from large flows of com-muter traffic between the scattered new settlements and the cities, as well as excessive groundwater ex-traction for construction purposes and air pollution. One of the most profound environmental problem is regular flooding of Jakarta’s canals and river system. According to Steinberg (2007) the causes for flood-ing in Jakarta surpass the geographical conditions of the watershed, the problems are mostly man-made. The main causes are: “(1) lack of carrying capacity of flood infrastructure; (2) reduction of capacity of ex-isting systems; (3) reduction of rainwater absorption due to urbanization and deforestation.”

The first cause relates to the Dutch colonisation from which the flood canal system was established. However, the system remains outdated and therefore proves to be insufficient. Second, the important wa-ter ways are reduced in width due to inappropriate waste dumping by riverbank communities living in Kampungs. Annually 14,000 m3 of household waste is deposited into Jakarta’s rivers each year, yet this is not cleaned by the government or the adjacent com-munities and significantly contributes to flooding. The urban poor lack sufficient housing conditions, sanitary facilities, efficient drainage systems and clean water supply (Vollmer & Grêt-Regamey, 2013). Due to insufficient public facilities, inappropriate waste dumping occurs. Waste dumping and illegal settle-ments by Kampungs along the Ciliwung river in Ja-karta caused the river width to change from 40-60m into 5-10m over the last decade, strongly decreasing the drainage capacity of the river. (Steinberg, 2007). Third, uncontrolled urbanization leads to reduc-tion of water absorption capacity. Ironically this is

happening in places where water should be retained (Steinberg, 2007; Ward, Pauw, van Buuren, & Marfai, 2013).

This relates to a recent trend in urban population growth in the urban centres of the JMA. It shows that people are moving away from the city cores. The rate of urban population growth of Jakarta declined from 3.1% over the period of 1980-1990 to 0.16% over the period of 1990-2000 (Firman, 2009). The land use conversion data in the region of Bogor-Pun-cak-Cianjur (Bopunjur) shows a similar trend. It is noted that the amount of hectares of settlement increased by over 26% over the period 1994-2001. Over the same period the amount of hectares of pri-mary forest decreased by 55% (see Table 1) (West Java Office of Central Board of Statistics, 2001).

In Bopunjur many villas are built to accommodate upper and middle-class city people from Jakarta, Depok and Bogor. These villas with often foreign names (e.g. Villa Orlando, Villa Venezuela) attract large numbers of tourists every weekend. This de-velopment has obviously violated the spatial plan for this designated water catchment area. It is suspected of having caused severe flooding in Jakarta in 2002, resulted in the government action of temporarily freezing housing development in the area, however at present it continues (Firman, 2004, 2009).

1.6 FindingsIt can be noted that the urbanization in the JMA increases pressure on adjacent regions. The area of Bopunjur is considered as a conservation area due to its function as a water recharge zone. However, if uncontrolled urbanization and land conversion in the area continues it is likely to result in serious negative environmental consequences in the downstream area, that is, Jakarta (Firman et al., 2011; Steinberg, 2007). The next chapter elaborates on what landscape archi-tecture theories are equipped to provide solutions to mitigate these environmental consequences.

2. Theoretical framework


8

Chapter 2: Theoretical framework

2.1 The field of landscape architecture 2.1.1 Definition of landscape architecture The discipline of landscape architecture can be de-fined as following: “Landscape policy advisors and designers are concerned with spatial quality issues arising from the disappearance of the boundaries between cities and countryside, and resolving spatial problems associated with the mixing of different cul-tures, the fight against hunger and poverty, and the promotion of social equality.” (Brink & Bruns, 2014, p. 7). Landscape architecture is considered as a strong discipline to address several grand challenges facing society, such as climate change and urbanisation. Since these challenges are embedded in landscape, there is a need for research that is able to address “issues in the social and physical transformation of land and environment” (ESF/COST, 2010, p. 1, 14).

Therefore a more suitable definition would be, land-scape architecture as a discipline that ‘‘involves plan-ning, design and management of the landscape to create, maintain, protect and enhance places so as to be both functional, beautiful and sustainable (in every sense of the word), and appropriate to di-verse human and ecological needs’’ (Brink & Bruns, 2014, p. 10). This means that landscape architecture works on the interactions between nature and society (Kleefmann, 1992).

To proceed, we need to define the concepts of na-ture and society. MacHarg (1969) explains that nature is an ‘arena of life’ guided by processes, therefore understanding these processes is indispensable for ‘survival and existence.’ Nature represents values and opportunities for human use. It also holds limita-tions and hazards if we do not treat it well. Steiner (2000) adds that landscape is related to land use and that human activity is always connected with land. In this perspective, the social concept relates to hu-man activity that is affecting the landscape. The sum of these human activities can be called ‘society’ and its interaction with nature forms the environment. These nature-society interactions and how these are approached by landscape architects are explained be-low.

2.1.2 Landscape-based design approach Landscape architecture research as being taught and researched at Wageningen University has its roots in several philosophies. Essentially it explains that landscape is seen as an integrated system of nature and society. Landscape architecture analyses these nature-society interactions and develops design concepts accordingly. The comprehensive theory is called the landscape-based design approach, which we explain by several research models developed in the works of Kerkstra and Vrijlandt (1988), Kleef-mann (1992) and Duchhart (2007). This theory is of great importance for this thesis as it elaborates on the ability of landscape architecture in addressing envi-ronmental problems.

2.1.3 Triplex model and socio-physical organiza-tion model The first model is the triplex model as developed by Kerkstra and Vrijlandt (1988). It is designed to ana-lyze landscape as the interactions between human and nature in a three-layered model, which consists of abiotic, biotic and anthropogenic layers (see figure 2.1). This model is based on the layer-cake model de-veloped by MacHarg (1969), one of the founding fig-

2. Theoretical framework

Figure 2.1 Kerkstra and Vrijlandt’s triplex model (1988)


9

ures of landscape architecture research, and it forms the foundation of the landscape-based design ap-proach. It recognizes landscape morphology, soil and vegetation and water flows as major land-use guiding principles (Duchhart, 2007). Kerkstra and Vrijlandt (1988) state that landscape is the visible result on the surface of the earth of the interactions between man and nature.

Landscape is therefore always in process, it is a collec-tion of dynamics between abiotic, biotic and anthro-pogenic systems. “Landscape is a system; a complex of existing relations, natural and cultural factors that constitute the totality we call landscape. It’s a web of structural elements of interconnected biological and geological systems” (Vroom 1976, p. 376). Steiner (2002) adds to this and argues for a human-ecologi-cal approach; this means that landscape is primarily a human ecosystem.

Although the triplex model embeds an anthropogen-ic layer other models are more directed towards the influence of human factors in landscapes. For a full understanding of landscape it is important to exam-ine beyond its physical dynamics. Duchhart (2007) acknowledges that the physical environment is often explained by human influences and she states that the anthropogenic layer of the triplex model often proves to be too limited.

Abiotic Economic

Cultural

Political

Environment

Biotic


Kleefmann (1992) developed a theory that builds around the sociophysical-organisation model (see figure 2.2). This model aims to abstract the relation-ships between man and nature and the necessary co-ordination of human activities in order to maintain or restore balance in the landscape. It is based on the mutual relationships between man and nature and consists of a nature and society layer. The nature layer contains an abiotic and a biotic subsystem, sim-ilar to the triplex model. However, the society layer is more elaborated and it is divided in an economic, cultural and political subsystem. The main principle is that society develops based on the limitations and opportunities of nature (Duchhart, 2000). The point of interaction between nature and society is the envi-ronment; this is the visible perception of landscape. In this sense, a perception of landscape is a mere snapshot of a continuous process of change (Duch-hart, 2007; Kerkstra & Vrijlandt, 1988).

Duchhart (2007) intertwined the previous models in order to study landscape as a hierarchically organised set of landscape systems that are bound together by integrated landscape-ecological and socio-cultural networks. Duchhart (2007, p. 195) mentions that “the triplex-landscape model is strong in analysing the tangible physical environment and natural organisa-tion principles, while Kleefmann’s sociophysical-or-ganisation model helps to bring to light less tangible issues, such as cultural taboos, and the way principles of social organisation interact with nature”. In this way, the model of Duchhart (2007) aims to gain a more comprehensive understanding of landscape and its underlying processes (see figure 2.3).

In this study we build around the model of Duchhart (2007) as it provides us a guideline on how to analyse and design complex landscape systems. This model captures the essence of the landscape-based design approach and therefore is a powerful research tool for landscape architects.

Figure 2.2 Based on Kleefmann’s sociophysical-organisation model (1992)


10


2.1.4 Landscape architecture in developing countriesIndonesia is considered as a developing country, therefore we are interested in the role landscape ar-chitecture could play in developing countries. People treat landscape differently in developing countries, as Duchhart (1988, p. 1) describes: “Landscapes form the source for the fulfilment of basic human needs as food, water, fuel and shelter”. Frankly this is also true for the developed world but it is more empha-sized in the developing world. Hence, we think land-scape-based design should supply these basic needs and should therefore be multifunctional, and always start from the primary needs of a local communi-ty (Duchhart, 1992). Due to this focus on primary needs, landscape architecture research in developing countries should draw upon culture studies, behav-ioural sciences and community studies (Duchhart, 2007; Lang, 1987).

The context of this thesis is unprecedented popula-tion growth and the influence of urbanisation, which is a common trend in developing countries. This puts substantial demands on natural resources at a speed and scale never experienced before. As a result en-vironments in both urban and rural areas are facing extreme degradation (United Nations Environment Programme in Duchhart, 2007). In the case of en-

vironmental degradation in Puncak several solutions are proposed by local NGOs (such as cleaning the rivers, reforestation and reuse of garbage). However, these actions are stand-alone solutions and provide only a temporary answer. A landscape-based design approach could integrate different spatial solutions from a natural and social perspective and thus en-hancing the environment in a more durable manner (Duchhart, 2007).

2.1.5 Landscape architecture in IndonesiaIt is of great importance to understand the local context in which we conduct this study. Given the decentralization of Indonesia after three decades of authoritarian rule, public participation is still a new concept. Indonesia is slowly moving towards in-creased engagement between state and society (Wid-ianingsih & Morrell, 2007). However, those afraid of losing power and control often show resistance in the transition to democracy. In general, the Javanese culture is very hierarchical and therefore may con-trast with the principle of community involvement.

Decentralization may aim for a more transparent and local oriented governance yet many bureaucrats are suspicious of participatory planning processes (Sugiartoto, 2003). Wever, Glaser, Gorris, and Fer-rol-Schulte (2012) state that public participation has

Figure 2.3 Based on Duchhart’s integrated model (2007)


11


become a keyword in the decentralization debate. Decentralization should open the door for the em-powerment of civil society by including local com-munities in managing natural resources.

As mentioned in the previous chapter, decentraliza-tion in Indonesia means change in the governmental systems and does not necessarily mean a higher level of participation of local non-governmental stake-holders. Government officials still usually favour business interests over local community needs (Bue-hler, 2010; Wever et al., 2012). However, Widianing-sih and Morrell (2007) notice that local communities are very eager to get involved in active participation once space is made available for civic engagement. This may be related to the Javanese concept of Got-ong Royong, which means ‘working together’.

Against this background we learn that participatory planning in Indonesia is likely to succeed when it has a strong support structure and active involvement from a NGO (Widianingsih & Morrell, 2007). Due to the hierarchical nature of Java it may not be clev-er to involve local government officials. Yet the sit-uation is improving and participatory environmental planning increases in popularity in Indonesia.

2.2 Need for participation

Considering the situation in Indonesia and the im-portance of community involvement in landscape architecture research in developing countries, we are interested in theories of participation in land-scape-based design. We state that humans are part of the ecosystem and therefore cannot be exclud-ed from landscape architecture research (Duchhart 2007).

2.2.1 Participatory Rural AppraisalReason and Bradbury (2008, p. 4) defined action research as: “a participatory process concerned with developing practical knowing in the pursuit of worthwhile human purposes . . . It seeks to bring

together action and reflection, theory and practice.” In other words, in action research, theory supports practical outcomes: “The existence of abstract theo-ry has no practical utility in itself … In this context action research provides a refreshing and highly pro-ductive alternative. Action research commences with problems or challenges in the world of everyday life. While there may be strong theoretical forestructures in place, the ultimate attempt is to generate change in existing conditions of life” (Gergen & Gergen, 2008, p. 167). Friedman & Rogers (2009) add to this by stating that through action research the world is being perceived the way the participants have come to understand it. It aims to understand the essential nature of the social world and the individual and col-lective behaviour of local people. The task of action research is “not to describe the world as it is, but re-alize visions of what the world can become” (Gergen & Gergen, 2008, p. 167).

Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) is a more speci-fied type of action research related to the context of this thesis. PRA consists of research methods and ap-proaches that enable ‘local people to share, enhance and analyze their knowledge of life and conditions, to plan and to act’ (Chambers, 1994, p. 1437). PRA aims to directly learn from local people and has prov-en to a powerful and popular participatory research method in rural areas. The knowledge generated is owned and shared by local people. In this way PRA has the goal to empower local communities.

Several methods are used by the local people to reach this goal, i.e. participatory mapping, institutional di-agramming and change analysis. PRA has proven to be effective in natural resource management pro-grams to enhance agricultural production, food secu-rity and health (Chambers, 1994). PRA aims to use a wide variety of methods which are triangulated and cross-checked in order to increase its credibility as a research method.

The outsider (i.e. external researcher) provides a ‘light touch’ (i.e. a participatory workshop) that activates


12

the local people to plan and to act. Participants who express and share what they already know also learn through sharing. Those who investigate and observe gain new knowledge. Those who analyse become aware of relationships and gain a deeper understand-ing. Those who plan and implement learn through the experience of action (Chambers, 1994).

Mascarenhas et al. (1991) defined three basic com-ponents for successful PRA: participatory methods, behavior and attitudes, and sharing. The components are most effective when performed in this sequence. Participatory methods are used to facilitate analysis by local people. The generated knowledge is owned by the local community and this leads to empower-ment. Next is a change of behaviour and attitude that corresponds with the generated knowledge of the previous component. Finally, sharing is of great importance to help continue the PRA program and further empower the local community. Local peo-ple share knowledge amongst themselves and with outsiders. Chambers (1994) states that outsiders (e.g. external researchers) are encouraged not to own ide-as or methods. To put local people first is of main importance. However, outsiders can share what they learned amongst each other and with local people.

2.2.3 Green Towns approachWe state that successful landscape architecture re-search in developing countries builds on PRA re-search that helps the local community to plan, to act and to share through a landscape-based design ap-proach. The Green Towns approach developed in an extensive PhD research in Kenya by Duchhart (2007) addresses the above mentioned. It integrates com-munity participation with the landscape-based design approach in order to let local communities come up with spatial solutions to environmental degradation. The Green Towns approach includes a 3-day partici-patory environmental planning (PEP) workshop (i.e. Green Towns Workshop). Its program is designed for the participants to identify environmental problems, come up with solutions and integrate this into an en-vironment development plan. The participants have

ownership over the gained knowledge and method. This makes the participants feel responsible for im-plementation and maintenance and management of the project. All this is likely to increase the sustaina-bility of a project (Duchhart, 2007).

Although the Green Towns approach proves to be a successful method to connect participation to the landscape-based design approach, it has never been tested in Indonesia. Therefore the method needs to be adapted to the local social context. In addition we aim to find ways to increase its efficiency by draw-ing upon recent techniques in participatory planning processes. This relates to the call for innovation to further develop landscape architecture as an academ-ic discipline. Brink and Bruns (2014) encourage land-scape architects to be innovative by providing valu-able contributions to practice-oriented research and by gathering empirical data for answering research questions. Lenzholzer, Duchhart, and Koh (2013) equally call for innovation to help advance the re-search capacities of the discipline of landscape ar-chitecture.

2.3 Visual methods as a tool

Although PRA showed its effectiveness in the past it can be developed further. PRA uses visual forms of dissemination (e.g. participatory mapping) as ef-fective ways of communication between the local people and the outsider. This study aims to enhance the visual nature of PRA analysis within the Green Towns approach by using recent software and com-munication technologies.

According to da Silva Vieira and Antunes (2014) photography based methods present potential ad-vantages in terms of communication in participatory environmental planning. Photo-surveys are “a type of visual methods that make use of photographs that can be produced by participants and interpreted by the participants themselves or the researcher” (da Sil-va Vieira & Antunes, 2014, p. 497). Photo-surveys are able to provide documentation of local knowledge



13

and can help to improve awareness of local issues among the participants (Petheram, Stacey, Campbell, & High, 2012). Gauntlett and Holzwarth (2006) add to this by stating that visual methods make it easier for participants to express their ideas and concerns with one another. Visual methods can also have the power to come across different audiences and stake-holders. In this way it is highly sufficient for sharing ideas, the ultimate of the three components in PRA research (Petheram et al., 2012).

Visual methods have another advantage over other methods such as questionnaires and language-based interviews. Photo-surveys help to overcome lack of engagement in group discussions. Photos taken by the participants themselves become the object of discussion; this allows participants to take owner-ship which helps to empower the community at hand (Packard, 2008). In the study of da Silva Vieira and Antunes (2014) it is concluded that for the above rea-sons photo-surveys are an efficient tool to be used in PRA studies. A study by Bergstra and Hornman (2013) adds the use of photo editing software (i.e. Photoshop) to the Green Towns approach. This method lets participants modify photos of environ-mental degradation into desired future images. This helps the participants to come to actual implemen-tation of their plans and proved to be very valuable.

2.4 FindingsFrom this theoretical framework we learn that land-scape architects have the ability to restore balance in disturbed society-nature relationships. The land-scape-based design approach is a comprehensive way to research and design landscapes in any given con-text. However, in developing countries such as In-donesia, community participation is required. PRA research is effective in addressing the primary needs of rural communities. The Green Towns approach connects the landscape-based design approach to PRA. Innovation in landscape architecture research methodology is necessary and therefore we aim to further develop visual methods in the Green Towns approach and test this approach in Indonesia.

The theories discussed in this chapter aim to explain the academic departure of this thesis. The research setup as explained in the next two chapters is based on this theoretical framework.


3. Problem framework


16

3.1 Connecting theories and forming the knowledge gap Brink and Bruns (2014) maintain that research meth-odology of landscape architecture needs to mature and that there is a need for innovation. Landscape architecture needs to develop a toolbox that helps to strengthen its academic position. The Green Towns approach by Duchhart (2007) is based on action research and participatory rural appraisal (PRA). It incorporates the landscape based design approach by intertwining the triplex model and socio-physical organisation model. Therefore we consider the re-search model by Duchhart (2007) as a highly suffi-cient tool to provide structure to the present study.

Although the Green Towns approach proves to be successful in Africa (see Duchhart (2007),Schave-maker (2010) and Bergstra and Hornman (2013)) it has never been adopted to developing countries in South-East Asia. We aim to take and adopt the Green Towns approach to Indonesia.

Brink and Bruns (2014) encourage landscape archi-tects to be innovative by providing valuable contribu-tions to practice-oriented research and by gathering empirical data for answering research questions. Len-zholzer, Duchhart, and Koh (2013) likewise call for innovation to help advance the research capacities of the discipline of landscape architecture.

By connecting the model to the transformative re-search design we aim to enhance the potential of the model to induce change and therefore environmental sustainability. In figure X this is illustrated, the arrow indicates the transformative aim of the model. As explained by Creswell and Plano Clark (2011) it is essential to focus on excellent communication with the community members during the data collection process. Therefore we focus on visual methods in the PRA research and PEP workshop.

3.2 Research significance and knowledge gap for collaborating partnersThis thesis aims to be of significance for audiences beyond the chairgroup Landscape Architecture of Wageningen University. Our collaboration partners of the Agricultural University of Bogor (IPB) and local NGO Ciliwung Institute should benefit from this study as well. IPB has extensive experience with PRA projects directed by the Community Based De-velopment research unit. The NGO has local knowl-edge and practical experience with community de-velopment in Puncak. Despite their wide range of projects they do both not incorporate a landscape based design approach. Currently IPB is conducting research in Puncak of which the goal is to help lo-cal village (i.e. Kampung) communities to deal with environmental degradation. Due to urbanization and increased tourism the environment is degrading. Kampung Gunung Mas is one of the Kampungs un-der study and selected for this thesis because it fac-es environmental degradation and is located at the heart of land use change and shifting social values (see chapter 5).

As stated in the previous chapter, the environment is a point of interaction between nature and society and requires integrated solutions. The landscape-based design approach is well equipped to meet these re-quirements. Therefore we aim to test this approach together with IPB and the NGO. The objective for IPB is to get inspired by a new approach to their PRA program. The NGO can be inspired and will be awarded with a new set of methods that can be used in future projects. Therefore the knowledge gap for IPB and the NGO is how the landscape based design approach can be incorporated in their projects and what principles they can use in the future.

3. Problem framework

Chapter 3: Problem framework


17

3.3 Problem statement From the knowledge gap the problem statement de-rives as following:

The landscape based design approach in participatory action research has not yet proven its effectiveness in Indonesia and there is a need for innovation by the addition of visual methods to optimize its potential.

To a more specific notion the following problem statement relates to the local context:

Urbanization of the JMA causes environmental degradation in Puncak that requires integrated spatial solutions from a local community perspective.

3.4 Main research question How can a landscape-based design approach help local Kam-pung communities in Puncak to come to integrated spatial solutions to local environmental problems?

By integrated spatial solutions we mean that these solutions need to address different landscape subsys-tems as explained in the model of Duchhart (2007).

The main research question will be answered in parts by the following sub research questions. These ques-tions serve different purposes (i.e. descriptive re-search, participatory research, explorative and prac-tical research).

Descriptive research: 1. What landscape processes form the current landscape of Puncak and Kampung Gunung Mas?

2. What are the main social and economic principles of the Kampung Gunung Mas community?

Participatory research: 3. What are the environmental problems and wishes and needs of the people of Kampung Gunung Mas?

Explorative research: 4. What adaptations can be made to the Green Towns ap-proach in order to encourage and maintain transformations in Kampung communities?

Practical research: 5. How to translate these research results into landscape design principles on various scale levels in Kampung Gunung Mas?

6. How to implement these landscape design principles on var-ious scale levels in Kampung Gunung Mas?

3.5 FindingsTo conclude, we think that the case of environmen-tal degradation in Puncak provides an excellent pilot to try to incorporate the landscape-based design ap-proach in the local context. This thesis aims to up-date a proved PEP method that provides new lessons and guidelines for IPB University and the NGO.

Chapter 3: Problem framework

Figure 3.1 Institutional embedding

4. Research design


20

4.1 IntroductionFor the most part this study is inductive research that is done and owned by a local community. Hence we consider this as qualitative research and it cannot be recognized as completely objective (Creswell, 2009). We do not have the intention to find generalizable and quantitative knowledge. The aim is to make sense of the problem in its context and to provide integrated spatial solutions from the perspective of a local community. However, we do aim to gener-ate new academic knowledge by reflecting on the research through designing process and its poten-tial transformative character for local communities. In this way we want to bring forth new insights on methodological principles of landscape architecture (Lenzholzer, Duchhart, & Koh, 2013). Hence, the overall goal of this study is to add to the body of knowledge of landscape architecture.

4.2 Philosophical assumptions Before we explain the setup of our research we must be clear on our philosophical ideas. This is needed to clarify our intentions and to make the research more transparent. This research frames itself within prag-matism with a subsystem of other knowledge claims. Due to its pragmatic character the study applies mixed methods research. In this research the prob-lem must be studied within its context, this can be defined as an interpretative analysis (Creswell, 2009). The different knowledge claims and the way they are applied in this study are explained below.

Pragmatism is associated with research that concerns applications i.e. it intends to tackle real-world prob-lems by coming up with practical solutions (Creswell, 2009). The main research question is connected to pragmatism as the answer aims to provide integrat-ed spatial solutions (and the reasoning towards these solutions).

For the sub research questions we mainly connect to the knowledge claims of social constructivism. Con-structivism relates to constructing an integrated vi-sion from individual perspectives. This can be trans-

lated into a wider pattern to gain a full understanding (Creswell, 2009). We highly value the social context of the problem. Therefore we connect to social con-structivism, which involves the human scale and suits the citizen perspective (Creswell, 2009; Wilhelm, 2011). This research aims to construct its findings from the bottom up by involving a local community in the process and therefore it seeks overlap with the participatory knowledge claim. This view is charac-terized by the desire to enhance society and to em-power marginalized communities (Chambers, 1994; Creswell, 2009). Finally this thesis aims to provide integrated spatial solutions with a high practicability. Therefore we relate to applied postpositivism to find practical landscape design solutions. This includes an additional study that aims to find cheap and easy im-plementations.

In summary, the coordinating knowledge claim is pragmatism and the sub research questions are en-tailed to a social constructivism framework. We place more weight at the participatory knowledge claim but aim to enhance the practicability of the landscape de-sign by connecting to applied postpositivism. Figure 4.1 illustrates the hierarchy of different knowledge claims and the associated research methods.

4.3 Theoretical lens Our theoretical lens describes the perspective from which we shape our research questions, collect and analyse our data, and offers reasoning when to take action or reaction (Creswell, 2009). Lectures on grand challenges of landscape architecture in a globalized world during the course Design Theory (LAR32306) inspired us. The lectures touched on postmodern problems, such as environmental degradation, re-source depletion, urbanization and climate change. We strongly believe that landscape architecture can make creative and innovative contributions in solving contemporary environmental problems. It serves as an interdisciplinary practice between the realms of society and nature. Hence, we should not be afraid to change our environment in a changing world.

Chapter 4: Research design

4. Research design


21


In other words, we consider our theoretical lens as a landscape architectural lens which guides us through-out the research process.

4.4 Transformative research designIt is interesting to note that the landscape architec-ture research models mentioned in chapter 2 describe only one moment in time. This seems implausible because landscapes are dynamic entities that are ev-er-changing. Lenzholzer et al. (2013) state that physi-cal and social systems are in constant change. This is also noticed by a study of Kraak (2009) which devel-oped the Genius-Loci model by adding the layer of time to the model of Duchhart (2007). In this way the model ‘reveals the opportunities and weaknesses of a certain site and explains the processes going on’ (Kraak, 2009, p. 23). Although time is important, we believe the model also lacks a change-oriented lay-er. Creswell and Plano Clark (2011) state that it is of great importance in participatory research to ac-

quire transformation. This study seeks to address the needs of underrepresented communities and a call for change (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011). There-fore we take a position in which we can be sensi-tive to the needs of the community being studied. In landscape architecture, the design can later be a recommendation of specific changes as a result of the transformative research.

When the above points of attention are being re-spected, the transformative research design holds great potential. Namely,

• The researcher is able to help empower indi-viduals and brings about social change and action. • The research is actively being directed by the participants • The researcher is likely to produce a collec-tion of methods that produces results that are both useful to community members and viewed as cred-

Figure 4.1 Based on Duchhart’s integrated model (2007)


22


ible to stakeholders and policy makers (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011, p. 99).

Therefore, based on the theoretical framework and the problem statement we choose to adopt the model of Duchhart (2007) in a transformative research de-sign. This is represented in figure X where we add a transformation layer to the model. This is connected to our emphasis on participatory research methods and the use of visual methods to improve communi-cation with the local community.

4.5 Relation between research and design This is a landscape architecture thesis and therefore designing should be actively employed within the research process. This is also known as ‘research through designing’ (RTD) (Lenzholzer et al., 2013). Before we elaborate on the research through design-ing process we clarify our perception of ‘research’ and ‘designing’.

‘Research’ is considered as a systematic activity to generate new valid and reliable knowledge or insights (Creswell, 2009) and ‘designing’ means ‘the process of giving form to objects or space on diverse levels of scale’, the noun ‘design’ means the results of the process of designing and they may have the objective to be executed or to change environments in a more abstract manner (Lenzholzer et al., 2013, p. 121). For this thesis we emphasize on procedural design (a fo-cus on the design process) rather than on substantial design (finished design products) (Lenzholzer et al., 2013). In other words, we do not aim for a blueprint design but the design is rather a set of ideas that helps the local community to continue their environmental development.

Because this research connects to the knowledge claim of pragmatism, the overall research through designing approach is pragmatic RTD. Lenzholzer et al. (2013, p. 124) state that “research questions posed within pragmatic RTD concern natural and cultur-al aspects as well as design procedures, often within a certain geographical context”. This means that a

well-structured pragmatic RTD may result in a ‘ful-ly’ integrated design. On the other hand, a random-ly mixture of research methods without a carefully planned RTD process may result in an incomprehen-sive design. Therefore we need to give clear struc-ture to the research and design relations in the other knowledge claims.

From the study of Lenzholzer et al. (2013) we can distinguish three different types of research and de-sign interactions: research for design, research on de-sign, and research through designing. To explain the difference between these three types we define these according to Lenzholzer et al. (2013, p. 121) before we continue with explaining where we apply which type of relation. In figure X we show in which part of the thesis process we apply which research and design relation.

Research for design (RFD): “Research informs design to improve the quality of the designed artifact and to increase its reliability. Such knowledge is then translated by the designer to substantiate the design.”Research on design (ROD): “Research is carried out on finished design products (substantial) or on the design process (procedural).”Research through designing (RTD): “The de-signing activity is employed as a research method.”

4.6 Design as synthesisThe overall philosophy we take for combining re-search and design is the design as synthesis model of Milburn & Brown (2003) (see figure X). The model is described as following: “This model defines the project as a vehicle for incorporating information collected in various ways while expressing design proficiency” (Milburn & Brown 2003, p. 51). This suits the research approach, as we start with collect-ing information, which will be compared later on and reflected upon. In our thesis, analyses conducted for the natural, social and design sub questions, will be brought together in the design.


23


4.7 LimitationsIn this thesis we expect some limitations as we plan to conduct research in an unknown country and culture. In general we need to be flexible and open-minded in order to deal with this. We listed limitations below:

• The local data resources might be limited depend-ing on our network.• Misunderstandings between the researchers and the inhabitants due to cultural differences.• Direct communication with the inhabitants could be limited, as we cannot speak Bahasa Indonesia and we need interpreters.• Different cognition of landscape could also be lim-ited due to a lack of understanding its cultural con-text.• Making appointments with locals and following our schedule during field work can be difficult due to cul-tural differences.

4.8 Participatory environmental planning: The Green Towns Project The Green Towns Project is a people-centred land-scape design experiment which orientated Kenya’s physical planning from 1996-2000. Through partici-patory workshops local communities used landscape design as a crucial tool in the integration of complex relations between landscape ecological and sociocul-tural principles (Duchhart, 2007). As a research re-sult, Duchhart (2007) developed a model that inter-twines the principles of Kerkstra’s triplex landscape model and the socio-physical organisation model by Kleefmann. Both models are fundamental for the landscape-based design education taught at Wage-ningen University. Duchhart (2007) gives several recommendations for possible improvement of the newly introduced landscape design processes. Given our standpoint for transformative research aims we suggest some adjustments to the socio-physical or-ganisation model of Duchhart (2007).

4.9 Case selection and institutional embedding With these theoretical starting notions and research methodology in mind we aimed to apply it to a case

study in Indonesia. Our collaborating partners are the Agricultural University of Bogor (Institut Per-tanian Bogor (IPB)) and the Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) Ciliwung Institute. Hence, we worked together with the Indonesian academic world and a practice-oriented organization. This helps to reach our goal to embed the landscape based design approach in PRA research in Indonesia and to devel-op practical guidelines.

4.10 Role of researchers and participants Due to the transformative character of this thesis, we take different roles during the process. We are con-sidered as landscape architects in this study. Depend-ing on the knowledge claim and research method at hand we switch from being independent researchers to being participants in the overall RTD process. The transformation does not include just us. All parties involved take different roles at various stages of the research process.

The above stated is illustrated in figure 4.2. The bar in the middle indicates the different activities in the research process. At the bottom we see the shifting role of the landscape architect. Above the bar we find the shifting role of the other parties (IPB, NGO and the Kampung participants).

The tables below explain the different roles of the four parties in the research process. Selections are made based upon own experience and observations in the field but draw upon PRA studies by Chambers (1994). The series of illustrations in figure 4.2 until figure 4.4 aim to show the progress of all parties and is not intended as a true accurate description. The figures provide a guide for the impact of different activities in the transformative research process and it shows what research methods are conducted by whom.


24

Transformative research design


Figure 4.2 Role of the landscape architect

Role DescriptionParticipant Actively participates in

the activity initiated by the other parties. No personal influence on the activity.

Additional facilitator Functions as a back-up for the main facilitators. Only has personal influ-ence when necessary.

Main facilitator Actively guides the ac-tivity. Has personal in-fluence but welcomes suggestions by the other parties.

Researcher/designer Works mostly independ-ent on the activity. Has regular communication with the other parties.

Status DescriptionOwnership Owns the knowledge

and initiates activities towards implementation or to develop further knowledge.

Empowerment Owns the knowledge and actively participates in the activity.

Involvement Seeks to gain knowledge and has personal interest in the activity.

Engagement Shows interest in the ac-tivity.


25

Role of the landscape architect The landscape architect (in this case the authors) is one of the initiators of this research. Therefore the starting role is of the independent researcher during the desk study and research preparation stage. The training of the PEP workshop to the facilitators of IPB and the NGO is facilitated by the landscape ar-chitect. The aim is to transfer knowledge of PEP to the other parties. Later the landscape architect works on the side-line during the actual workshop. At the stage of the following workshops the landscape ar-

chitect utilizes its education by using visual methods to help the participants imagine their future environ-ment. At the stage of implementation (i.e. Action day) the landscape architect is merely participating. After this the PEP workshop is evaluated by all par-ties. Upon return in the Netherlands the landscape architect takes yet again the role of independent researcher. Derived from the collected data by the participants, the landscape architect draws up a land-scape design which is replied to the other parties to stimulate further transformation.



26



Figure 4.3 Role of IPB and the NGO


27

Role of IPB and the NGO

The other initiators of the research are IPB and the NGO. IPB is involved from the start of the process by communicating with the landscape architect. The NGO is introduced later to the process. Both IPB and the NGO gain ownership of the PEP workshop by the facilitators training. The actual workshop is fa-cilitated by both parties yet they stay open to sugges-


tions from the participants. After the workshop, IPB stays involved but the NGO takes initiative in steps towards implementation. IPB returns to ownership status at the evaluation. After the fieldwork IPB and the NGO actively continue the research process and stay in contact with the landscape architect.


28



Figure 4.4 Role of the kampung participants


29

Role of the Kampung participants

The participants start without much expectations and grow in the process of the PEP workshop. At the end they own the generated knowledge and they initiate steps towards implementation. Proud of their plans and efforts they continue activities that aim for further development.



30


4.11 Data collection process The data collection process in this study has an iterative process. The flowchart in figure 4.6 aims to explain this in an understandable manner. This diagram explains the different research and design relations (i.e. research for design (RFD) and research through designing (RTD)). We start in the Netherlands with literate study and prepara-tions for the fieldwork. In Puncak we start exploring the area to get a local understanding. It is important to no-tice that in the exploration phase we are independent re-searchers whilst in the PEP workshop we are subordinate to the facilitators and participants. Data resources were limited available therefore we contacted experts to verify the collected data.

Visual methodsAccording to da Silva Vieira and Antunes (2014) draw-ings, videos and photographs are excellent tools to com-municate with communities. These visual methods are integrated to some kind in the original Green Towns Workshop but we aim to experiment further. Emphasis will therefore be on visual methods. The main tool in the workshops is a Microsoft PowerPoint presentation pro-jected on a large screen.

Desk studyThe desk study is the preparation phase of the thesis in which we explore the problem and theoretical context, define the knowledge gap and problem statement and set-up the research questions.

Landscape analysis Observations It is important to understand the social-cultural context of the study area. Therefore we take scheduled observa-

tions in specified areas of Kampung Gunung Mas. The observation report is included in the appendix. We ob-serve in five different places on one weekday and one time in the weekend. Data is collected by taking notes, making drawings and taking photographs.

Explorative walks/talks Explorative walks are a suitable method to get acquaint-ed with the study area. It is also efficient in making the community familiar with us as external researchers. We take numerous explorative walks as our accommodation is from walking distance to the Kampung. These walks are paired with talking to as many locals as possible; although language is a limitation, an interpreter of the NGO joins us on many occasions.

Map analysis Maps of the study area are limited. Although through drawing and comparing maps we get a good understand-ing of the different layers in the landscape. Instead of map we rely on aerial photographs from Google Earth and own interpretations. With help from IPB we do have the topography, land use, water system and soil maps.

Photo analysis The photos taken during the observations will be reviewed later according to the knowledge we gained through the methods mentioned above. By quick analysis we can in-dicate different problems and opportunities and connect them to landscape characteristics.

Workshop preparations Green Towns Workshop (PEP workshop) – Participa-tory Environmental Planning – Participatory Research through Designing – Participatory Landscape Designing

Figure 4.5 Workshop adaptation


31


Drawing; RTD – draw your dream. Photoshop workshop & Timeline workshopThe Photoshop workshop uses Adobe Photoshop to help communities visualize their environment development plan. This workshop is developed by Bergstra and Horn-man (2013) and this study aims to refine it and give con-tinuation to it. The participants take pictures of environ-mental problems during the fieldtrip on the second day of the PEP workshop in their Kampung. The photos that match with the problems they want to solve according to their environment development plan will be selected to modify in the Photoshop workshop. This gives a number of problem photos from which the Action Group could choose to visualize in Photoshop. After making modifi-cations to the photos the Action Group decides to bring one Photoshop (i.e. a desired future image of a part of their Kampung) into action during the Action Day. After this the Action Group meets again to think about long-term development. The group decides on a time frame for further actions and can place remaining Photoshops alongside of it. This new method is an experiment to see if it can help the participants to continue their transfor-mation after we leave Indonesia.

Questionnaires To validate the PEP workshop we take 30 questionnaires among random inhabitants of Kampung Gunung Mas (50% female; >18 years old). The questionnaires are structured by an open list of questions that needs to be filled in by the participant. The questions are similar to the ones asked during the PEP workshop. This makes the two methods better comparable and enhances the ability to use questionnaires as a validation method.

Evaluations To validate the collected data during the PEP workshop we conducted evaluations with the involved parties (i.e. participants of 3-day PEP workshop, Action Group, facil-itators of IPB and the NGO). The aim of this is to share and discuss the PEP workshop methodology to further adapt it to Indonesia.

Validation techniques A pitfall in participatory research is the position and bias of the researcher. To prevent that our passion for the pro-ject turns into emotional attachment and thus potentially clouding our view or influence the participants, we aim to validate research results. In this way we aim to minimize the amount of divergent or unreliable information. 4.12 Findings In short, the research design is set up based on the the-oretical notions of the landscape based design related to PRA research methods developed by Chambers (1994). An overall research methodology is derived from the Green Towns approach by Duchhart (2007) with addi-tions of visual methods by da Silva Vieira and Antunes (2014). The RTD process is dominantly connected to the pragmatic knowledge claim of Creswell (2009) and aims to develop a procedural landscape design (Lenzholzer et al., 2013). The following chapters elaborate on conducting the research and the found results.

Figure 4.6 Research set up

5. Landscape analysis


34

case study for transformative landscape design research as it contains disturbed human-nature relationships. The institutional embedding of this project also plays a major role in the selection of this site (see chapter 4).

5.1 Jakarta Metropolitan Area

5.1.1 General informationBefore we move into Puncak we shortly describe the landscape of the Jakarta Metropolitan Area (JMA) i.e. Ja-botabek. Figure 5.3 shows the geographical features of the JMA. In the north we see Jakarta city, an extremely dense urban centre. The land in the north is dominantly flat and this is the reason for this urban density. In the middle the sub centre of Depok is located which lies on the edge of the flat plains and the hilly volcanic area. Java is famous for its large number of (active) volcanoes. This result in great altitude differences over a short distance. The differences are visible in the JMA where over a 40 kilometers distance from Bogor (+200m) to Gunung Gede (+2900m) there is a difference in altitude of 2700 meters. As seen in figure 5.1 this provides sublime vol-canic landscapes. However, this also has its limitations on the cultivability of land and it has significant impact on soil erosion. Volcanic soils are highly fertile and at every opportunity the soil is utilized. Hence, the Javanese have the tradition of terrace farming i.e. paddies. A very char-acteristic sight of Indonesia is the many lush green rice paddy fields along the slopes of volcanoes (see figure 5.2). The upstream area of the JMA is characterized by these features. This area is called Bopunjur which is an accumu-lation of Bogor, Puncak and Cianjur. This study will focus on the Puncak area (see figure 5.3).

5.1.2 Climate Indonesia has a tropical climate with just two seasons. The dry season starts in April and lasts until October. The monsoon lasts from November until March, in which most of the precipitation falls. Tropical storms results in large quantities of rain. The Bopunjur region has on aver-age 7000 mm/year while Jakarta centre has on average 500 mm/year (Steinberg, 2007). To compare, the Netherlands has 700 mm/year over the course of four seasons. Jakarta is the agglomeration of 13 rivers that are fed by rain and originate from the volcanic ridge to the south. Figure 5.3 shows the flow of the largest river i.e. the Ciliwung River.

Introduction

This chapter covers the landscape analysis of the study area. This landscape analysis connects to our philosophi-cal assumptions as explained in chapter 4. The landscape analysis is part of the knowledge claim of social-construc-tivism. Therefore we take an approach which is adapted to the local context. We use techniques from the regional landscape analysis as described by Kerkstra and Vrijlandt (1988) such as upscaling, cross-sections and analysis of abiotic and biotic layers. In addition we aim to collect data by taking field walks, having open-ended talks, observa-tions, photo and sketch studies. This data collection pro-cess is depicted as research for design (see chapter 4). We focus on both the perceivable landscape and the way hu-mans interact with it. In this way we are able to ‘read’ the environment as a human-nature relationship as described by Kleefmann (1992).

We start by looking at the larger structures, and then we fill in the details (Duchhart, 2000). The scale levels this land-scape analysis entails are the Jakarta Metropolitan Area (JMA), the area of Puncak and the level of Kampung Gunung Mas. The aim of landscape analysis is not to fully analyze the landscape at hand but merely to provide an impression for the reader. In the next chapter we explain the participatory environmental planning workshops and its participants will further analyze the landscape on the Kampung scale.

Due to the underdeveloped status of Indonesia it was difficult to find reliable data for this landscape analysis. Hence we based a part of these findings on own obser-vations. It may be that our interpretation influenced the landscape analysis. Therefore this chapter cannot be seen as completely objective investigation. Time of fieldwork in Indonesia: March 17th until May 14th 2014 (edge of monsoon and dry sea-son)

Site selection

The reason for selecting Puncak as our study area is relat-ed to the context of this thesis as explained in chapter 1. Puncak is one of the fringe areas of the JMA. This rural area is facing environmental problems caused by influenc-es of urban pressure. Therefore this provides an excellent

Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

5. Landscape analysis


35

Figure 5.3 Geographical overview of the JMA and the selection of Puncak as study area

Figure 5.1 View on volcano Gunung Gede Figure 5.2 Rice paddy fields in West-Java



36


5.2 Puncak scale

5.2.1 General information Puncak is a rural area in the foothills of the volcano Gunung Gede. From around 1700 the Dutch got in-terested in Puncak and founded large tea plantations. After independence in 1945, Puncak became more integrated with the JMA because of the construction of a new road i.e. the Puncak Pass (see figure). From the 1980s Puncak turned into a popular tourist desti-nation for people from dense urban areas in the JMA. This happening attracted many investors to Puncak who found opportunity to build large numbers of hotels and villas for tourist accomodations. By the end of the 1990s, after decentralization, the construction of hotels and villas got out of control (see chapter 1). Although Puncak was designated as a conservation area to mitigate floodings downstream, housing development continued. This caused forests, rice paddies and tea plantations to decrease which has negative impact on the water retention capacity of the area. Nowadays Puncak is one of the biggest tourist destination in Java by numbers of visitors per year.

5.2.2 Inhabitants A large group of the population consists of farmers who lived here for many generations. An increasing-ly large group of the population consists of immi-grants from other parts of Java. The farmers originate from West-Java and belong to the Sundanese ethnic group, which is an Islam socie-ty. Therefore the majority of the people in Puncak, as in most parts in Indonesia, are Muslim. Many native people are engaged in rice and vegetable farming, work on tea plantations and collect forest resources such as fuelwood and fodder. The immigrants come from the JMA, Bandung and other parts of Central-Java and East-Java. They seek job opportunities in the touristic sector and usually work in hotels or as traders. These immigrants com-pete for jobs with the local people and often accept lower salaries. Local people are for this reason not satisfied with the increasing tourist sector in Puncak.

5.2.3 Urbanisation and environmental problems These days Puncak is depicted by environmental problems. The increasing number of tourists and im-migrants and the related growing number of house-holds, cause pressure on the environment. Along the Puncak Pass, the urbanisation has expanded its way into the tea fields and forest conservation areas (see figure 5.5-5.6). This often results in soil erosion and landslides, causing more sedimentation in the wa-ter system. This sedimentation eventually clogs for example the Ciliwung River which is likely to cause floods downstream in Jakarta. Another environmental problem is the illegal dump-ing of garbage by tourists and local communities. Waste dumping in rivers happens at many occassions and this is known to cause troubles to downstream, such as floods, diseases and loss of biodiversity. Now we will explain the interrelationships between the environmental problems and other landscape dy-namics by dissecting Puncak into landscape units.

5.2.4 Landscape units Puncak consists of five major landscape units i.e. rainforest on the steep slopes, stream valleys, tea plantations, villas in the hills and the urban centre along the Puncak pass (see figure 5.5). The distribu-tion of these landscape units is related to the volca-no of Gunung Gede. As stated above volcanoes in Indonesia have very steep slopes. Due to the slope, the land from an altitude of around 15% is not suita-ble for cultivation. The dominant landscape unit here is the rainforest. The rainforest consists of Gunung Gede National Park (GGNP), which is a protected area for biodiversity, and production forest at the edges of the tea plantations. The latter are used for resource collection by local communities. However, these forests are of importance for the conservation function of Puncak. Collecting fuelwood is therefore often an illegal activity. This causes deforestation and therefore soil erosion in the tea fields and other land-scape units down the hill.


37


Figure 5.4 Puncak elevation cross-section model

As stated above, Puncak is essentially a volcanic land-scape. The prevailing soil type is the Andosol, which is a young soil consisting of volcanic ash and rocks. These soils are highly fertile due to good permeabili-ty and the high amount of organic particles. Because of these features, the soils are also light and therefore erosion sensitive.

The water system is dendritic because many streams spring from the rainforest on the volcanic slopes.

Villages are located at flat areas, mostly at the foot of the volcano and near a stream.

Rainforests and tea plantations function as protective landscape units for a healthy water system and good soil quality. Uprising urban landscape units such as the urban centre and the villas in the hills decrease the rainforest and tea fields.

We see the interrelationships between different land-scape units in the cross-section in figure 5.11. Figure 5. 12 elaborates on this by explaining landscape fea-tures, their functions and user groups and different problems and consequences that occur.

38

Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

As seen in figure 5.5 and figure 5.6, the landscape in Puncak changed drastically over a short period of time.

Figure 5.5 Landscape situation 1990 (Adapted from IPB Puncak land use map, 1990)

39

Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

Figure 5.6 Landscape situation 2012 (Adapted from IPB Puncak land use map, 2012)


40


Figure 5.7 Aerial photos along Puncak Pass (google earch, 2002)


From figure 5.9 to figure 5.12, the increasing urban settlement along Puncak Pass over the last 12 years are shown through aerial photos .


41





42


Figure 5.11 Landscpae units analysis on Puncak scale

Legend

Urban centre-Kampung Gunung Mas

Villas & touristic area

Tea plantations on ap-prox. 1000-1500mRainforest on steep slopesStream valleys

Puncak pass-main road


43



44


A: Villas in the hills

B: Urban centre along the Puncak pass

Altitude mean height of +1000m

lithosols soil

villas and dryland agriculture

pollution of streams, surface hardening, urban expansion enhances erosion

hotels, restaurants, shops, markets along the main road

pollution of streams,surface hardening

clogs with sedimentation and garbage, vegetation along streams decreases

living, transport

big amounts of rainwa-ter flows downhill

andosols and lithosols soil

wet staturated landwet staturated land and big amounts of rainwater flows downhill

andosols and lthosols soil

mean height of +950m mean height of +1000m

Soil

Land use

Water level

Environmental problems due to urbanisation

Figure 5.12 Schematic cross-section of landscape units of Puncak and their interrelationships

C: Stream valleys


45

clogs with sedimentation and garbage, vegetation along streams decreases

living, transport living, tea fields

landslides, careless tourism, pollution of streams

National Park owned by the Indonesian state high ecological value, logging

deforestation, landslides, soil degradation

wet staturated land wet staturated land and big amounts of rainwater flows downhill

wet staturated land big amounts of rain-water flows downhill

andosols and lthosols soil

andosol soil, good permeability and high amount of organic particles yet suscepti-ble to erosion

basement lava rock with thin top layer

mean height of +1000m mean height of +1200m mean height of +1250m


C: Stream valleys E: Rainforest on the steep slopesD: Tea plantations

Kampung Gunung Mas


46

5.3 Kampung scale

Gunung Mas is one of the 11 kampungs in Puncak regency, belong to Tugu Selatan sub-district. The kampung is located as the first village along the river stream on the edge of the conservation zones. Most of the 1100 inhabitants in Kampung are working in the tea plantation surrounded. The Tea Company has the “Land Cultivation Rights” (Hak Guna Usaha/HGU in Bahasa) which given by the state in a period of time (usually 35 years maximum) which can be extended for 25 years. As Puncak became a popu-lar tourist destination, large numbers of tourist villas also situated close to Gunung Mas. During weekends, thousands of visitors from Jakarta or Bogor visit this tea planation area, which activity provides an eco-nomic opportunity for the kampung inhabitants, but also causes problems i.e. garbage issue, traffic issue on Puncak Pass every Friday and Sunday.


Figure 5.13 Land use map of kampung

Mosque

Building

Fish pond

River

Tea plantation

Forest

5.3.1 Landscape units

Gunung Mas consists of five major landscape units i.e. rainforest on the steep slopes, tea planation, steam valleys, villas in the tourist area and the kam-pung centre. The interrelationships between differ-ent landscape units are elaborated in the cross-sec-tion by explaining landscape features, their functions and user groups and different problems and conse-quences that occur (see figure 5.21-5.33).


47


Figure 5.14 Landscape units analysis on Gunung Mas

Legend

Urban centre-Kampung Gunung Mas

Villas & touristic area

Tea plantations on ap-prox. 1000-1500mRainforest on steep slopesStream valleys


48

Landscape features Functions User groups

Trees Wood, shade Community

Landscape unit A - Rainforest on the steep slopes

Figure 5.16 Figure 5.17


The rainforest surround kampung supposes to be conservation zones however, the garbage dumping on the edge and illegal logging by kampung inhab-itants cause deforestation and soil erosion (see fig-ure5.16, 5.17).


49

Problems Consequences

Illegal collection of fuelwood, garbage dumping near the edge of kampung and forest

Deforestration, soil erosion

Figure 5.18

Figure 5.15 Schematic cross-section of landscape units of Gunung Mas-rainforest



50

Landscape unit B - Tea plantations

Figure 5.20 Soil erosion in tea field Figure 5.21 Tourist activities in tea field



Tea plantation

Sandy and stoney path

Trees

Tea production

Access along the tea fields

Shade

Tea workers

Tea workersTourists

None

The tea plantation is located in between the rainfor-est and the river banks (see figure 5.19). The tea plan-tation attracts many tourists to do horse riding in the tea field (see figure 5.21). However, soil erosion is happening in the tea field (see figure 5.20).


51Figure 5.22 Tea plantation environment

Figure 5.19 Schematic cross-section of landscape units of Gunung Mas-tea plantations



Soil reosion

Garbage dumping along roads

None

Decreased production

Polluted environment, less tea production

None


52

Landscape unit C - Kampung located in the valley

Figure 5.24 Garbage in Kampung Figure 5.25 Water runoff along street



Trees

Residential houses

Tourist villas

Tea factory

Stoney roads

Home garden

Fish pond

Wood, shade

Living

Tourist service buildings

Tourist museum

Access along the kampung and tour-ist areaEconomic plants

Fish farming

Community

Family

Tourists

Tourists

Community and tourists

Family

Community

Due to the kampung was located in the valley along the steep slope, there is always water occurs along the street (see figure 5.25). The build-up area in kam-pung is used residentially. Most houses in kampung have home garden. Some houses have fish pond he-hind house. There area villas located outside of kam-pung. The tea factory situated in between kampung and tourist area. In addition, the garbage dumping sites within kampung are random situated (see figure

5.24).


53

Figure 5.23 Schematic cross-section of landscape units of Gunung Mas-kampung

Figure 5.26 Kampung environment



None

Garbage around houses

Careless tourist littering garbage in the Kampung

None

Floods on the road

None

Polluted water

None

Garbage dumping in the river

Increased garbage in the kampung

None

Water run-off, and polluted drinking wa-terNone

Less fish production


54

Landscape unit D - Cisampai river banks

Figure 5.28 Garbage in the river Figure 5.29 Source of water



Trees

Canal

Cultivated land

Sandy and stoney roads

Fruits, wood, shade

Fishing, washing, playing, drinking water resource

Fruits, vegetables, spices

Access along the tea field andKampung

Community

Community, tourists

Community

Community and tourists

As the first kampung situated along the river spring, the water is already polluted by the garbage in the river (see figure 5.28). Furthermore, the original veg-etation along the river banks is changing into cultiva-tion land by the local inhabitants, which activity will increase the soil erosion risk and sedimentation due to the land cover change (Steinberg, 2007 ).


55

Figure 5.27 Schematic cross-section of landscape units of Gunung Mas-Cisampai river banks

Figure 5.30 River banks environment



Illegal collection of fuelwood, garbage dumping in the river

Garbage in the river

Land cover change

None

Increased water run-off Increased sedimentation in the river

Polluted environment, increased sedi-mentation

Soil erosion

None


56


Tea Company Local government (Kepala Desa)

Local NGO(Ciliwung institute)

Management Communition with IPB University to connect the other stakeholders

Facilitating actions to protect Puncak area

Management

Land use right

Live

Working in the tea planation

Inhabitants

Table 5.1 Power of different stakeholders

5.3.2 Sociocultural organisation

The kampung study area is owned by the state, but managed by the local government and the Tea Com-pany. As IPB University stated, the tea company is the strongest in the term of stakeholders pow-er, and the NGO’s/CBO’s is the lowest one. Most policy is driven by the Tea Company. Local NGO as community-based organization, they have a well connection with IPB University, who has the capacity to connect different stakeholders (see table 5.1).


57


Figure 5.32 Model of a farming system

Figure 5.31 Home garden system

To get an understanding of the relationship between human and nature, observation, photo and sketch study are conducted. As figure 5.31 shows, the typi-cal house unit in Gunung Mas has self-sufficient sys-tem. The ornamental plants, fish pond and chicken as economic activities are surrounded by the house. Collecting fuel wood and fruits from the forest, and working in the tea field consist the model of farming system in Gunung Mas (see figure 5.32).


58

Figure 5.35 Water runoff along main streetFigure 5.34 Water flow in kampung

Figure 5.33 Cross-section of the main street in kampung


Figure 5.36 shows, the kampung is valley-forming type with a relatively steep gradient. Along the main street in Kampung, the houses are located on steep slope (see figure 5.33 5.35). The drinking water supplies with pipes along the street (see figure 5.34). During monsoon, the water always occurs from different directions into kampung (see figure 5.36).


59

Figure 5.37 Water flow analysis

Drinking water supply

Figure 5.36 Cross-section of kampung



60


Figure 5.38 Ourdoor activities in Gunung Mas

From observations and photo study, we understand that social activities outdoors are of great impor-tance for the community of Kampung Gunung Mas. As the figure to the right explains, the ourdoor space is functioning as an extension of indoor space. Dur-ing leisure time, the majority activities are happening outdoor.

Play badminton

Sell goods


61


Eating

Chatting

Wedding ceremony

Dry laundry


62

Figure 5.39 Photos displaying the qualities and opportunities in Kam-pung


Edge of kampung and tourist areaTea factory

Water supplys system

Terraces close to river banks


63


Tea plantation (soil erosion occurs)

MosqueTea plantation (garbage dumping along road)

Tourist area (horse riding)

Stone pavement on street


64

Figure 5.40 Photos displaying the activities and opportunities in Kam-pung


People playing badminton in sport hallTourist horse riding through tea plantation

Wedding ceremony tent on the street


65


Children playing on street

Women chatting outdoor

Children playing badminton


66


Figure 5.41 Bird’s-eye view of kampung from the tea plantation

5.4 Findings

Puncak is located at the foothills of the volcano Gunung Gede. The landscape is characterized by the fertile yet erosion sensitive volcanic soils. Five different landscape units are recognized which hold relation to the elevation pattern of the region and change in land use due to ur-banisation. Puncak is designated as a conservation zone for the downstream area of Jakarta. However, due to the fast-growing tourism sector, the number of urban units and villas in the conservation zones is increased in Pun-cak. Kampung Gunung Mas is located on the edge of this conservation area and faces environmental degradation. Due to heavy rainfall in the monsoon and the location of the Kampung in the valley, water is always present.

The community of Kampung Gunung Mas is relatively homogeneous. The household is a self-sufficient system. Natural resources are exploited in the form of small-scale agriculture and illegal logging for collecting fuelwood. Social activities happen mostly outdoors and consist of sharing food, playing sports, selling goods, ceremonies and chatting. The community is very close with each oth-er as many people are born in Kampung Gunung Mas and lived here all their lives. This helps the community to encourage each other to work together (Gotong Royong in Bahasa Indonesia). The knowledge we gained from landscape analysis will be used in the landscape plan.


67


6. People-centred landscape based design


70

Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning

6.1 IntroductionBefore we come to the actual participatory environ-mental (PEP) workshop we explain the steps we took to adapt it to the local context. The facilitators of the workshop will be introduced and the program is made clear.

The facilitators organized the Green Towns Work-shop, from which in-depth information about the lo-cal landscape is acquired from its inhabitants.

At the same time the local community is stimulated to actively plan their own living environment. After the Green Towns Workshop a group of inhabitants continued with the implementation of their plans, this is the so-called Action Group.

Two action group meetings were held to support the group going forward, in which Photoshop modifica-tion and long-term thinking got introduced.

To validate the workshop results 30 questionnaires were conducted alongside several observation points to understand the local landscape.

The following sub question is being answered in this chapter.

What are the environmental problems and wishes and needs of the inhabitants of Kampung Gunung Mas?

6 . Participatory environmental planning

Figure 6.1 Cooperative institutions (Ciliwung insitution, IPB Univer-sity)

6.2 Other workshops

ProposeLearn from local participatory workshop experience Make first step for adaptation

Result100% male participantsUnequal discussion, mostly dominate by one or two personThe maps made by participants were based on per-sonal scale experience, which made the results diffi-cult to verify.

ConclusionThere is a need for equal discussion during the work-shop.In addition, the opinion from female participants also needs to be taken into account.


71


Figure 6.3 IPB workshop process

Figure 6.2 IPB presenting their workshop findings


72

Figure 6.4 Facilitators (from left to right Amin, Tedja, Fia, Erik, Ninis, Agus)

Figure 6.5 Facilitator training process


The Green Towns Workshop has been made possible by the following facilitators: - Muhammad Aminuddin (Amin) lead facilitator community development program IPB- Tedja Kusumah facilitator founder Rungkun Awi - Lutfia Nursetya (Fia) facilitator student soil sciences IPB- Erik Mulyana (lead) facilitator student plant sciences IPB - Agnisaa Dwi (Ninis) facilitator student landscape architecture IPB - Agusman Lubis (Agus) facilitator student landscape architecture IPB- Thomas van den Berg student landscape architecture WUR - Hanshu Liu student landscape architecture WUR


73

6.3 Facilitators training

As described earlier, we believe the workshop would be more effective if our team of facilitators would be a bit larger. Initially we aimed for a group of six facilitators in total, in the end Amin and Agus joined us, bringing the total number of facilitators including us to eight people. The team of IPB and Rungkun Awi helped us with a location, writing the workshop report and adapting the program to the local context. We are very grateful with this team on our side and its previous experience with community workshops.

According to the original workshop, each facilitator has a different role. Amin was the lead facilitator throughout the Friday and Saturday. Due to personal reasons of Amin his task was adopted by Erik on Sunday. The workshop consists of exercises that are conducted in plenary or in small groups. At times, the plenary group was divided into four small groups. Each group was facilitated by one student and Amin and Tedja would divide their attention among all groups. During the field trip the four small groups were joined by two facilitators. We decided to join each a different group to be able to divide our atten-tion during the field trip.

To remove bias and to adapt all facilitators to the same aim, we organized a facilitators training on Fri-day 4th of April, one week before the workshop. The main goal was to make the facilitators familiar with

Figure 6.6 ‘U’ shape chaires layout in the center surrounded by four desks which provides flexible transformation opportunity between large and small groups

Figure 6.7 Workshop poster

Computer station

U-form

MasalahKesulitan lingkungan apa yang Kampung Anda hadapi? Jenis masalah apa yang telah Anda temukan dalam kaitannya dengan lingkungan ?

TujuanDengan mempertimbangkan Dengan mempertimbangkan pembangunan yang berkesinambungan dari Kampung Anda, apa yang ingin Anda capai? Bayangkan Kampung Anda yang baik dan ideal. Seperti apa Kampung ini akan terlihat? Bagaimana lingkungan dapat dilindungi, lingkungan dapat dilindungi, sekarang dan di masa depan? Masalah apa yang ingin Anda pecahkan dan kapan?

Bagaimana mencapainya?Bagaimana Anda akan mencapai Bagaimana Anda akan mencapai tujuan ini? Langkah-langkah yang diperlukan dapat divisualisasikan dalam peta dan gambar. Proses visualisasi akan membantu Anda untuk menemukan pertentangan dalam rencana Anda.

AksiMelalui kerangka konsep program aksi nyata dikembangkan . Setiap program terdiri dari beberapa proyek .

Workshop: Menuju Kampung Gunung Mas yang berkelanjutan

Peserta : 25 orang dari KampungGunungMas Fasilitator : Tedja Kusumah, Muhammad Aminuddin, Lutfia Nursetya, Agnisaa Dwi, Erik MulyanaTempat : SDN Gunung Mas Makan Siang : 12:40 , 12 , 13 AprilWaktu : 13:00-17:00, 11 April 8:00-16:00, 12 April 8:00-16:00, 13 April


the landscape based design approach. We discussed the local landscape and its environmental problems/opportunities together with the team. Next to this we explained the program, general workshop skills and shared mutual expectations. We were open for suggestions from the facilitators to adopt the Green Towns Workshop to their needs as well. Based on their advice we changed the time schedule. With their help the written language was adopted to Bahasa In-donesia.


74


To make the original Green Towns workshop suita-ble for our research purposes we applied a number of adaptations.

First, the original program is three days from 8 AM until 5 PM. The NGO staff advised us to shorten its length due to working and praying hours of the par-ticipants. We scheduled the workshop on Friday 11, Saturday 12 and Sunday 13 April 2014. Friday is the most important praying day for Muslims in Indone-sia. Therefore we decided to start after Dhuhr (noon prayer). The participants from Kampung Gunung Mas indicated their desire to finish at 4 PM each day. They need their time to prepare dinner and to spent time with their families (see chapter 5 on Everyday Life).

To further adapt the workshop to the Indonesian context characteristic drawings of local people and culture are depicted in the PowerPoint presentation. This may help the participants to get acquainted with the method and to understand the different assign-ments. Examples of these drawings can be found above (see figure 6.8, 6.9).

Second, this is the first time that this participatory planning method is brought to Indonesia. In the original workshop participants watch seven instruc-tional videos about human-nature relationships to provide examples and start discussions. These videos show communities in urban centres in Kenya, Africa. From our perspective, these videos are not suitable to show to the participants in Kampung Gunung Mas. Hence we searched for equivalent Indonesian

6.4 Intermezzo - Adaptations

Figure 6.8 Drawing in PowerPoint presentation for map making assignments


75


videos. As a result we showed four videos with the following themes(see figure 6.11)

Third, previous theses in which the Green Towns Workshop is applied (Bergstra & Hornman, 2013; Schavemaker, 2010), advise to use more facilitators than the commonly used number of four people in total. For the workshop in Kampung Gunung Mas we formed a team of 8 facilitators (including our-selves).

Diskusi video 2

• 15menit

1. Apa yang masyarakat dapatkan dari lingkungan? 2. Apa kerusakan lingkungan? 3. Apa peran masyarakat dalam lingkungan?

Figure 6.10 Drawing in PowerPoint presentation for video watching and discussion assignments

Figure 6.9 PowerPoint presentation set up during the workshop


76


Figure 6.11 Video snapshots (Original Kenya videos, Adapted new Indonesian videos)


77

Fourth, the overall method includes a Photoshop workshop to help the action group to envision the implementation of their plans (Bergstra & Horn-man, 2013). We believe this specific workshop has great potential and this thesis aims to further devel-op this. Therefore photographs and its modifications are incorporated in the entire workshop process. The participants take their own photos of environmental problems during the fieldtrip, which help to discuss the problems with the plenary group. Later the same photographs are modified by the Action Group in the Photoshop workshop (see figure 6.11).

Last, in our opinion a long-term environment devel-opment exercise is lacking in the original program. Therefore we extended the Photoshop workshop with a Timeline workshop, in which the Action Group plans their modified photographs along a timeline to envision further implementation.

Figure 6.12 The photographs and its modifications process during field trip, discussion, Photoshop workshop and Timeline workshop



78


6.5 PEP workshop - day 1

Introduction The goal of the first day is to draw the problem map for Kampung Gunung Mas, which provides an overview of the environmental problems in the kampung. To reach this goal, the participants do several exercises. The work-shop is officially opened by the Kepala Desa (i.e. Mayor) of Tugu Selatan (i.e. municipality). After this the partici-pants are shown a video about environmental problems in West-Java which can be related to their own kampung. This results in a list of problems that are present in Kam-pung Gunung Mas. To understand the spatial component of these problems the participants are assigned to draw a base map. In the base map they indicate different land-scape units such as river, built-up area, tea fields and for-est. Finally the mentioned problems are added to the base map, this forms the problem map. The results for each exercise are explained below. At the end of the day the fa-cilitators write a summarizing report and prepare the next day (see the Appendix for the detailed program).

Video assignment 1: Environmental problems DescriptionThis video shows environmental problems that are affect-ing a community in West-Java. The video shows examples such as landslides and illegal logging. It explains who is suffering and it shows the attitude of the people towards the problems (see the Appendix for the videos).

PurposeThe purpose of this exercise is to stimulate discussion

between the participants about environmental

problems in their kampung. While watching the partici-pants take notes. After the video the participants answer several questions that help to start the discussion. The questions and answers can be found in the results of this exercise.

ConclusionThe video made its purpose by starting an active discus-sion about environmental problems in Kampung Gunung Mas. The facilitators managed to keep a lively discussion and involved nearly all participants. Preferably all prob-lems listed should have a spatial component to sufficiently link to the following exercises. This was not always the case as ‘lack of awareness’ and ‘poverty’ are also men-tioned as environmental problems.

Results Question 1: What are the different environmental problems shown in the video?

Natural degradation by illegal logging Low social welfare or poverty Lack of waterLack of environmental awareness Overexploitation of natural resources Planting of pine trees making adjacent agricultural land less productiveSuboptimal forest management Land slides

Question 2: How do the environmental problems relate to your kampung?

Natural degradation by illegal logging Low social welfare or poverty Lack of environmental education Overexploitation of natural resources Suboptimal forest management Land slides Garbage and lack of disposal placeTourists are not concerning the environment Lack of infrastructure for a sustainable environment Lack of public awareness and care for the environment

Question 3: Who suffers?

The group answers collectively that they all suffer from the environmental problems in their kampung.

Official opening

Introduction day 1

Video 1: Environmental problems

Base map

Problem map

Summary day 1Preview day 2

Write report day 1Prepare day 2

Friday 11th of April 2014

Figure 6.13 Flow diagram of day 1


79


Figure 6.14 Base map of Kampung Gunung Mas

Figure 6.15 Problem map of Kampung Gunung Mas

Drawing the base map

DescriptionFor this exercise we prepared a skeleton map that shows the basic elements of the kampung (river, built area, tea fields and forest). The participants were divided into four small groups. Each group was asked to add spatial detail to the skeleton map, this is their base map. Participants drew on a transparent paper and indicated the different el-ements of their environment with different colours. Later the base maps are combined into one by voting for the best representative map.

PurposeThrough this exercise the participants develop a feeling for the spatial characteristics of their kampung and its surrounding environment. This is of great importance to come to spatial solutions later in the workshop. The map also functions as a base layer for the other maps.

ConclusionThe participants drew up their base maps although some believed that the skeleton map was detailed enough. Therefore the base maps turned out to look like zoning maps where different function or use of land is indicated with different color. Eventually the exercise met its goal to let the participants develop a spatial understanding. The base map was used for the following exercises.

Results


80


Figure 6.16 Workshop process (video watching)

Figure 6.17 Workshop process (Bas map making)


81


Figure 6.18 Workshop process (Map discussion)


82


Drawing the problem map

DescriptionThe plenary group is divided into four small groups. Each group was asked to revise their list of environmental problems. The objective was to indicate a location on the base map for each problem. Participants copied the prob-lems listed on smaller cards and pasted them onto the base map. As a result each group made a draft problem map. Then the participants selected the most complete problem map and added problems where necessary.

Purpose With this exercise the group gained insight in the spatial position of the environmental problems. The aim is to re-late environmental problems to landscape characteristics and to start the discussion on environmental responsibil-ity.

Conclusion The problem map seemed to be complete and satisfactory for the participants. They were as specific as possible in indicating of the environmental problems. However, still non-spatial problems such as ‘poverty’ came to light. The results show an overview of the problems and their loca-tion in the kampung.

Results See figure 6.19

Conclusions of day 1 At the end day 1 the participants indicated the main en-vironmental problems in Kampung Gunung Mas, namely the garbage in the river, illegal logging in the forest and lack of maintenance and infrastructure to the built-up area. Other problems concern poverty and careless tour-ists polluting the environment. Through map making ex-ercises the group gains insight in the spatial context of the environmental problems.

The results of day 1 are: - Overview of environmental problems in Kam-pung Gunung Mas - Base maps to use in following exercises - Problem map which indicates the location of each problem

Figure 6.19 Translation of problem map


83



84

IntroductionFor the second day the main goal is to understand the causes and effects of the environmental problems in Kampung Gunung Mas and how the participants can solve them. This is done by recapping the day before, by an introduction video and by exploring the causal relationships of different problems. To validate the results of day 1, the participants went in the field to find specific environmental problems. The day was closed by a video and discussion on how they can solve these problems by working together.

Video assignment 2: Man-nature relations

DescriptionThe video explains about human-nature relation-ships, it shows what the environment provides for people and what happens when it is not treated well. It is starring a nearby community in Gunung Gede National Park that suffers from river pollution, ero-sion and deforestation. These environmental prob-lems are induced by humans and the video explains the consequences for the community.

Purpose

By watching this video the participants will gain un-derstanding of the role of humans in the environ-mental system. This knowledge helps the participants to come to solutions to their environmental prob-lems later in the workshop. The group takes notes while watching the video and have a discussion on human-nature relationships by answering the ques-tions (see the results).

ConclusionThe participants seemed to misunderstand the ques-tions 2 and 3. They answered the questions for their own situation rather than the one shown in the video. Eventually this did not seem to matter because the objective of the exercise was to discuss the role of people in the environment and to understand that nature provides resources and enhances life when it is treated well. From the answers we can tell that the participants did understand the exercise. Results Question 1: What does the environment provide for the people?

Agriculture crops and food Fresh water to drink and for washingClean air Fertile soil Wood for fuel and construction material

Question 2: What damages the environment?

Decline in water quality Land use change for urban expansion The lacking ability of the soil to infiltrate water Air pollution

Question 3: What is the role of people in the environment?

People should dispose their garbage in the right placesThere is a need for raising public awareness trough a campaignPeople should replant the forest (reforestation) People should recycle their garbage and compost or-ganic waste People should utilize land in a more sustainable way

Review day 1

Introduction day 2

Video 2: Man-nature relations

Problem tree

Field trip

Video 3: Working together

Summary day 2Preview day 3

Write report day 2Prepare day 3

6.7 PEP workshop - day 2Saturday 12th of April 2014




85

Making a problem tree Description For this exercise the participants elaborated on their environmental problems by determining the causes and effects. The four small groups each make a prob-lem tree from eventually one is elected. After a short discussion the participants decide to focus on five main environmental problems (see the problem tree in the results).

Purpose By thinking about the causes and effects of the en-vironmental problems the participants can find links between the problems. When combined with the problem map the links get a spatial context. The aim is to discuss on the causes and effects and to make the first step towards solutions.

Conclusion The exercise proved to be effective for the participants, it helped them to better understand the environmental


Figure 6.21 Problem tree of Kampung Gunung Mas

Figure 6.22 Translation of Problem tree

problems and the links between them.

Results Original problem tree Translated problem tree


86


Field trip

Description To further specify the problem tree within the spatial context of the Kampung, the participants went on a field trip for 90 minutes. Once again the participants split into four small groups. Based on the problem map and problem tree the facilitators assigned four target areas for the field trip. Each group would visit one area and is joined by two facilitators; both of us joined one group to spread our attention (i.e. group 2 and group 4). To be able to present their findings to the other participants, we equipped each group with a camera to take photos of findings in the field. The participants projected the photos on the large screen and also presented additional maps and results of in-terviews (see figure). Some of these photos are later modified in the Photoshop workshop and Timeline workshop (see chapter 6.3 and chapter 6.4). The groups filled in data sheets to record their field trip (see figure X). These sheets make it easy for us to compare all findings. Purpose The objective of the field trip is to observe the envi-ronmental problems for the specified areas. Besides observations, the participants also draw maps and in-terview local residents to verify the problems.

The field trip aims to find the following:• Any additional problems • Causes and effect of the problems as listed in the problem tree • Any observable solutions

Conclusion The field trip achieved many results for the par-ticipants. They got the chance to bring their newly gained knowledge to the field and to discuss with other inhabitants. The addition of visual methods such as the photos was a great tool to share findings and to stimulate discussion.

Results Map of field trip per group and problem photos.The questions are derived from the data record sheets filled in by each group:

Group 1 - Area 1:

What problems did you find in your area?

Garbage in the Cisampai river and around houses of the residents Reduction of woodlandSurface runoff in the streets

What caused these problems?

The lack of rules on waste disposal Tree cuttingThe conversion of forest to agricultural land

What are the effects of these problems?

Wild animals disrupt the village Landslides Decrease in soil fertility

What solutions did you observe?

Reforestation in the logging area People plant shade plants on farms for intercropping

What is the opinion of people living in the area?

There is a limited amount of sanitation facilities and people do not like the littering The forest has not been treated well although the agriculture land increases people’s income

Group 2 - Area 2:


Lots of garbage is dumped in the Cisampai river by tourists Garbage piles up on vacant land Air pollution


87


The loss of animal habitat is very disturbing and dangerous for people

Group 4 - Area 4:


Air pollution in the kampung Garbage in the tea fields and Cisampai river


Smoke from fuelwood when cooking Vehicle exhaustsHorse manure What are the effects of these problems?

The smell is unbearable It makes it harder to breath clean air


Awareness programs for people to live clean


There is a need for sanitary facilities

After the field trip the participants decided that they wanted to solve the following five main environmen-tal problems: 1. Garbage in the Cisampai river 2. Garbage in and around the kampung 3. Bare land as a result of illegal logging 4. Soil erosion as a result of illegal logging 5. Air pollution and smell


No garbage disposal place or it is too far awayNo garbage sorting facilities and garbage manage-ment


Garbage degrades the river and tourist areas Many flies and mosquitoes


A Garbage Bank can solve the garbage management problem There is a need for specialized organisation to man-age the waste


The community wish for funding to purchase new garbage management facilities People propose to burn trash in the dry season

Group 3 - Area 3:


Garbage in the Cisampai river Landslides Decrease of animal habitat and biodiversity What caused these problems?

Illegal logging causes erosion and the diffusion of water is reduced Hunt on wild animals


The raptor now hunts the village community


Reforestation in the logging areasRestoration of the forest as a habitat for wild animals



88

Group3 Group4


Group1 Group2

Figure 6.23 Four groups field trip routes together with problem photos they indicated


89


Figure 6.24 Selected 15 problem photos


90


IntroductionThe main goal of the third and final day is to draw the en-vironment development plan and to make an action plan. Prior to this, the participants will draw several maps that will be combined to form the environment development plan. For this we adopted the original exercise of ‘mak-ing 4 maps’, in which the participants map the resources, urban development areas, land protection and worst-case scenario. It was interesting to try this method, which lays at the foundation of landscape-based design, with the participants who are unfamiliar with this method. Finally an action group of 8 people was elected to carry out the action plan. At the end of the day the participants evaluat-ed the entire workshop. The Green Towns Workshop was ‘officially’ closed and we showed gratitude to the partici-pants by handing out diplomas. In return the participants responded satisfied to the work they achieved.

Video assignment 4: Making of thematic mapsInitially we would like to start day 3 with an example video of how to draw thematic maps. The purpose of this is to inspire the participants for the actual map making exer-cises. However, the lead facilitator Amin found the video unnecessary and he preferred to verbally explain the exer-cise. The other facilitators agreed with this approach and consequently the video was excluded from the program.

Map exercise: 4 maps Description For this exercise the participants were divided into four small groups. Each group got the task to make a differ-ent thematic map (i.e. resources and income from the en-vironment (1), suitable areas for urban development (2), land protection areas (3) and a worst-case scenario map (4)). The maps are drawn on a transparent paper that is overlaying the base map. The different maps and their conclusions are listed below.

Purpose The purpose of this exercise for the participants is to ap-ply the gathered knowledge of day 1 and day 2. By draw-ing thematic maps they discover what they value in their environment. This is necessary to start thinking about en-vironmental development. The aim for each group is explained below:

In the original Green Towns Workshop this group maps the suitability for agricultural land. To modify this exercise to meet our research needs we chose a wider scope. We felt that it should cover more than just agriculture as the inhabitants have a more extensive economic relationship with the environment. For example they gain resources and income from forestry, bee-farming, tea fields and horticulture.

The Yellow Group draws a map that shows which are-as are suitable and desirable for urban development. The participants also included the desired location for new garbage management facilities and infrastructures.

The Blue Group draws a map of the areas that should be protected. These areas have high environmental value and should be protected from further degradation.

The Red Group provides a counterpart for the Blue Group; this group draws a map of the areas that will face

Review day 1, day 2

Introduction day 3

Video 4: Making of maps

Four thematic maps

Conflict maps

Environment development plan

Draw your dream

Action plan

Election of Action Group

Evaluation and closing Write report day 3Prepare Photoshop

workshop

Sunday 13th of April 2014

6.8 PEP workshop - day 3



91


further degradation if no action is taken. This map is the so-called ‘zero map’ of ‘worst-case scenario map’.

Conclusion The map making exercise provides a wide array of infor-mation. The participants discuss on what they would like to improve in their environment. During the process they relinked to the problem map, problem tree and their find-ings in the field. This gives a coherent research process in which the participants own the knowledge.

Results Green Group – Resources and income from the en-vironment The participants listed the following resources and in-come: 1. Wood from the forest 2. Tea fields 3. Cultivating vegetables, agriculture and horticulture 4. Cultivation of flowers and fruit 5. Livestock and others; honey bees, fish, chicken, goat, song birds

Yellow Group – Suitable areas for urban development The participants listed the following points regarding ur-ban development:

1. Repairing of several roads 2. Development of a landfill facility

3. Improve the cultural building (Rumah Madrasa)4. Establish a new kiosk to sell goods to tourists5. Repair public toilets

Blue Group – Land protection areas The participants listed the following areas that they think should be protected:

1. Forests2. Their homes3. Cemetery 4. Tea plantation 5. Cisampai river

Red Group – Zero map; what happens if we do noth-ing? The participants listed the following scenarios:

1. Forest area will continue to decrease in size by other development 2. As a results, landslides will occur more often 3. The garbage will narrow the Cisampai river, reducing its runoff capacity

Making of conflict maps Description The conflict maps are a continuation of the previous ex-ercise. The participants compare the different maps to determine areas of conflicting interests. This will result

Figure 6.26 Zero map making process Figure 6.27 Resource and income map making process


92


Figure 6.29 Results of Resources and income map and Urban devel-opment map

Figure 6.30 Map making assigment introduction slide on PowerPoint

Figure 6.31 Translation of conflect map 1

in two maps which are called ‘conflict maps’. The Green Group overlays its map with the Yellow Group and the Blue Group does the same with the Red Group. At the end of the exercise, each pair of groups presented their conflict map and thematic maps to the other groups. Purpose The goal for this exercise is to start the discussion on en-vironmental development for Kampung Gunung Mas. The participants prioritize which areas they want to devel-op and for what purpose.

Conclusion This exercise led to some interesting results. Economic activities such as bee farming and should be enhanced while housing development is not a priority. Actions to reduce landslides and river pollution are necessary for a healthy living environment.

Results Conflict map 1There is a conflict between bee farming and housing de-velopment; the participants value the economic potential


93


Figure 6.32 Results of Land protection areas map and Zero map Figure 6.33 Map making assigment introduction slide on PowerPoint

Figure 6.34 Translation of conflect map 2

of bee farming, therefore housing development should not interfere.

- Location to cultivate ornamental plants may in-terfere with the community health centre. Participants de-sire an expansion of the cultivation area but it must not disrupt the health centre.

- The group wants to build a new kiosk to be able to sell cultivated products. Although this will be located in the same place as the cultivation area.

Conflict map 2- Landslides occurring at the edge of the kampung. The group wants to solve this by relocating vulnerable houses and by reforestation to mitigate the landslides.

- The river will become more clogged with waste making it narrower. The group suggests to clean the river and to relocate the houses that are close to the river.


94

gathered in the workshop and as a guideline for future development.

Conclusion The environment development plan is a collective vision of the ideal kampung. In the ideal situation the environ-ment would be clean and there would be no garbage in the river. The environment would be providing a daily income for all people and the forest would no longer be subject to illegal logging. The drawing process proved to be a dy-namic, interactive activity in which a great majority of the participants actively participated.

Results (see figure 6.36)Forest area: - Reforestation of bare land by planting Sengon, Kaliandara and Aprika treesRiver area: - Community will work together to clean up the garbage in the river- Warning signs should be placed to prevent further littering in the river Income area: - Replace old tea plants by new ones - Cultivate production plants such as flowers, fruits and medicinal plants - Establish bee farms Infrastructure: - Develop Garbage Bank (garbage management facility for organic and inorganic waste) - Construction of public toilets - Prepare a place to produce compost from organic waste - Increase the number of garbage disposal points (TPA) and improve garbage management.

Action plan: priority actions Description With their freshly designed environment development plan the participants are eager to take action to make the plan become a reality. In this exercise the group is trig-gered to think of actions that are able to implement the plan. The facilitators provide a list of criteria that each realistic action must meet: - What problems does the action solve? - What resources are needed?- What resources are available?- Who should be involved for successful action?- What are possible difficulties and how can they be overcome? - How long will the implementation take? Each participant lists four priority actions that according to him or her are needed to realize the environment devel-opment plan. The participants discuss their list of actions with their neighbours.

Draw your dreamDescriptionIt may be challenging for the participants to envision their ideas in a spatial setting. Therefore the participants are asked to ‘draw their dreams’ on small cards which they could add to the environment development plan. In other words, they are asked to visualize their ideal living envi-ronment through small sketches.

Purpose This exercise aims to stimulate the creative minds of the participants and helps to imagine the future environment and visualizes actions for implementation.

Conclusion The small addition of this exercise provides an extra layer to the environment development plan. This visual meth-od helps the participants to think beyond problem-solv-ing. In this exercise participants are triggered to also think about beautification and aesthetics.

Results As shown below, the dreams are divided into different cat-egories: Protected area:- Maintain the existing forests and replant Kaliandara and Sengon trees - Restore the water catchment capacity of the forests River area: - Clean the river of garbage - Maintain the river to keep it clean Income area: - Tea fields are of great importance because they provide income for many people and should therefore be maintained well - Participants want to optimize land use and cultivation around their homes to earn extra income Infrastructure: - Participants want to have infrastructure facilities for garbage management, public toilets and public hygiene

Environment development plan Description At this point the participants have a clear idea in mind of how to develop their environment. To make these ideas become a reality they need to be fixed in the environment development plan. Based on the conflict maps the group draws the plan on a transparent paper.

PurposeThe aim of this exercise is to collect all ideas and con-flicts for the spatial environment of Kampung Gunung Mas and concise them into the environment development plan. This plan serves as a summary of the knowledge



95

Purpose The purpose of this exercise is to come to a list of priority actions (i.e. action plan) and to think of who will imple-ment these actions and what is necessary.

Conclusion After the group discussion a collective list of four priority actions is made. This exercise was useful for making the participants think about the practicability of their ideas.

Results List of four priority actions (i.e. action plan): 1. Making new garbage disposal point (TPA) 2. Cleaning up the river by removing the garbage 3. Composting of organic waste 4. Planting medicinal plants and ornamental plants in the gardens

Election of action group Now the action plan needs people to organize the imple-mentation of the different actions. This will be the so-called Action Group. Each participant could apply to be-come a member of the Action Group, although the group should consist of 50% female members and of people from all age groups. The facilitators also made clear that the Action Group works voluntary. After a short election the participants selected the following people: After the election, the Action Group plans their first meeting to achieve immediate results. The group propos-es to have the first meeting on 16 April 2014, three days after the PEP workshop. In this first action group meeting the group will specify the action plan and organize the

first day of implementation (i.e. action day).

Evaluation and closing Before the workshop was officially closed, the participants filled in an evaluation form. The results of this evaluation will provide feedback for us and IPB and the NGO to further develop this workshop method. The results are found in the appendix. Initially the Kepala Desa would also officially close the workshop but he was unable to attend. Therefore the fa-cilitators closed the workshop. As a token of gratitude and success we gave each participant and facilitator a PEP workshop diploma. The people from Kampung Gunung Mas responded to be very satisfied with their achieve-ments the past three days.

Conclusions PEP workshop The PEP workshop proved to be an effective research through designing exercise that results in ownership of the gathered knowledge by the participants. The Green Towns Workshop functioned as a sufficient guideline for the overall process. We added visual methods such as the fieldtrip photos and the ‘draw your dream’ exercise. These methods were effective at sharing findings among participants and to imagine the results and procedures of actions towards environmental development. The envi-ronment development plan and the action plan are fair-ly detailed and seem sufficient for continuation. In the end the transformative process is more important than the workshop products. Therefore we can say that the PEP workshop was a great success for the participants of Kampung Gunung Mas.


Figure 6.35 Everybody received their Green Towns Workshop diploma


96


Figure 6.36 Development plan of Kampung Gunung Mas


97



98


6.9 Photoshop workshop

kampung (see 6.3).

ProcessFigure X shows the process of the Photoshop Workshop. The 15 photos are shown next to a collection of Photo-shop images of trees, plants, garbage management facili-ties, materials and photos of people of the kampung. The latter is added to make the workshop feel more personal. Before they start to modify the images, the Action Group revisits the action plan and the criteria for efficient ac-tions. This is necessary to reconsider their priorities and to recognize unrealistic actions. Facilitator 1 leads the dis-cussion on the revision of the action plan.

Consequently the 15 photographs are shown to the par-ticipants. They are asked which problem areas they would like to improve according to the action plan. The facilita-tors suggest they can start by selecting two photographs considering the time limit of the meeting. The participants started with the picture of the garbage heap at the edge of the Kampung. Quickly the group de-cided that this place needs a large garbage bin (TPA) and ornamental plants to mask the concrete box.

The second picture shows one out of two main roads where the water cannot properly drain during the rainy season. According to the Action Group the location will be improved by fixing the road, by deepening the adja-cent drain and to make it more attractive with ornamental plants (in this way they aim to attract more tourists). After the surprisingly fast modification of two photo-graphs, the group decided to continue the exercise. A third photo was selected, this time the group discussed about what actions need to be taken to restore the river. The participants suggest cleaning the river from garbage, to add plants to the river bank to make it more attractive, and to place warning signs to prevent further littering.

The final photograph shows another informal garbage dump in the kampung. The group wants to clean this as well and introduce ornamental plants afterwards to make Kampung Gunung Mas more attractive.

ConclusionThis exercise resulted in four modified photographs that illustrate a part of the desired living environment. When compared to the original photos the group gained under-standing in what organization is necessary to be able to

IntroductionTo support the Action Group in implementing their en-vironmental development plan we organized a first action group meeting in which they visualized their desired ac-tions by using Photoshop. This method got introduced by Bergstra and Hornman (2013) as an addition to the origi-nal Green Towns Workshop (GTW), for them it proved to be an efficient tool to provide the participants an idea of how their future environment will look like. It is designed to help motivate the participants to start taking action.

Description This meeting was attended by 7 out of 8 Action Group members. The location was a small office of the tea com-pany, next to the house of one of the participants.

This meeting was facilitated by the following people: Facilitator 1: Tedja Kusumah (NGO) – discussion leaderFacilitator 2: Thomas van den Berg – presenterFacilitator 3: Hanshu Liu – Photoshop

Facilitator 1 started the discussion to guide the group dur-ing the entire workshop in visualizing their action plan. Facilitator 2 presented a PowerPoint to inform the partic-ipants about the objective of this meeting. All the while, the facilitator 3 used Photoshop to modify the photos ac-cording to the wishes of the Action Group.

Layout and adaptations We tried to further develop the Photoshop workshop by integrating it in the entire participatory process. During the fieldtrip the participants took photos of the environ-mental problems and other findings in their kampung. These photos are used in this Photoshop Workshop. Since the participants of the PEP workshop took a large amount of photos we decided to present only 15 photos to the Action Group in this workshop. In this way we re-duce the number of duplicates and yet it covers the envi-ronmental problems in the entire kampung (see figure X). Purpose The objective is to modify a selection of these images ac-cording to the environment development plan and action plan, this will help the group to imagine their future living environment. We assume that this exercise will help them to gain motivation to take action, as proven by Bergstra and Hornman (2013). The resulting modified images are later used in the Timeline workshop, in which the Action Group thinks about the long-term development of their


99


Computer station

Presentation screen

make the modified photos become real.

At this point the group is unsure how to start the imple-mentation of their ideas. Facilitator 1 suggested starting by implementing one image for the upcoming Action Day (see chapter X). With this in mind the group selected the third image as their objective for the Action Day; they aim to clean the river from garbage and to improve the river banks by additional vegetation and warning signs. After the Photoshop Workshop, facilitator 1 opened a short discussion to prepare the Action Day. At the end of the meeting the Action Group assigned each other different tasks (i.e. gathering participants, collecting tools and gar-bage bags, spreading the word)

We may conclude that this method is indeed as effective as described by Bergstra and Hornman (2013). It provides an easy way for the participants to visualize their future living environment. This stimulates them to start the im-plementation phase. It proves that the usage of photos taken by the participants in the PEP workshop gives a sol-id foundation for the Photoshop workshop. As a result, the photos are quickly recognized by the Action Group members. In this way the workshop is in line with the work done before.

DiscussionAlthough this method is fast and effective, we wonder how it would result into long-term development. The Photoshop workshop is designed to motivate the Action Group to organize the Action Day, but it does not address

what happens afterwards. We think this can be improved, hence we decided to have a second Action Group meeting after the Action Day in which the group thinks about the long-term development of Kampung Gunung Mas.

Action day On the action day the people of Kampung Gunung Mas cleaned the Cisampai river of garbage. Around 80 people joined the action day among men, women and children. The Action Group initiated the action and the NGO pro-vided tools and disposal bags. A video of the day can be found in the appendix, which gives a good impression. Figure X shows the achievement of the participants in a series of photos.

Figure 6.37 Photoshop workshop process


100


Action group Photographs of problem areas

The worst scenario

Choosing tools for the implementation

Desired future

What happens if no action is taken?

Action!

Start

Criteria for action

Figure 6.39 Photoshop workshop digital library with local trees, people, and solutions

Figure 6.38 Photoshop workshop assigment explaination PowerPoint slide

Figure 6.41 Four selected problem photos and their photoshop results


101


Figure 6.40 Live Photoshop process


102


April 2014

14 total

6.10 Timeline workshop

Introduction

This part explains the addition we made to the participatory process i.e. the Timeline workshop. We refer to chapter 2 in which we reason for the integration of visual methods in PRA research i.e. the PEP workshop. The Timeline workshop is an experiment designed as an attempt to help communities to plan future actions for the environment development plan.

The Timeline workshop is facilitated by the same people as the Photoshop workshop namely Tedja Kusumah of the NGO Cil-iwung Institute and ourselves. The main method is again to use Photoshop to let the participants create a desired image. This time the participants are asked to place the results from the Photoshop workshop (i.e. actions to be fulfilled to realize the environment development plan) along a timeline. The partic-ipants decided to set 31st December 2014 as the preliminary limit for their timeline. This way their timeline spanned from April until December 2014.

Results

The second action group meeting or so-called Timeline Work-shop is designed to further help the community implement their action plan after the first action day. The main goal of this workshop is to encourage people to continue with the actions after we leave and to have a long term development plan in mind. As written in chapter X, we think this will be of added value to the original Green Towns Workshop. The principle is

Figure 6.42 Timeline Workshop process

Figure 6.43 Results of Photoshop workshop and Action day on PowerPoint to encourage people to continue their actions


103


similar to the Photoshop Workshop; the Action Group decides where to place which action on a timeline. They could choose from the 14 modified images which we continued Photoshop the other 11 problem photo based on their first meeting’s pref-erence list (Photoshop library of trees, plants, and facilities). Three facilitators were organizing this meeting, one of them using English to present the PowerPoint and asking questions, one of them taking responsibility of translating English into Indonesian to the participants, and one was working on the Photoshop and timeline image setting visualizations based on the discussion results. The workshop was organized from 20:00 to 21:30, 23th April in the Madrasa building.

List of facilitators Tedja Kusumah (NGO) – discussion leaderThomas van den Berg – presenterHanshu Liu – Photoshop

LayoutTo encourage participants continuing their spirits, firstly, the meeting started by summarizing the results of the Action Group meeting and action day. The comparative photos were shown to the participants which were photos of the action day, the modi-fied photo, and the photo taken after the action day in the same place (Image 6.43 ). After this the participants were explained by the facilitators about the goal of this workshop. In addition, they were asked to have a discussion about their preferred time period for this timeline development plan. The result was that they wanted to have actions until the end of 2014.

Secondly, the participants were shown the other 14 modified photos together with the original problem photos beside, in the meantime; they were questioned what was changed in these photos by what actions or investment and if they were satis-fied with all the photos as visions for their kampung. During this process one of the facilitators was modifying the image using Photoshop by adapting all the wishes from participants into visuals.

Thirdly, the participants were invited to have a discussion about which vision from these 14 photos they want to take after the first action, at what time, and what action needs to be taken to achieve this vision. This process repeated until they placed all the photos on their timeline. At the end, the participants agreed within their group that they would like to start with the lower cost actions (such as cleaning river, planting trees and flowers), at the same time the Action Group will try to build their net-work with different levels of stakeholders. At the end of 2014, they assume to find sufficient funding for new facilities (e.g. garbage bin, pavement material).

Finally, the participants shared their opinion about this meeting and the meeting was closed by the facilitators. And both digital file and the hard copy file of the timeline and development plan were handed over to the participants after the meeting.

DiscussionThere was something about the communication that needs to be mention here. First, the time and location of the workshop was decided by the action group people at 18:30 in Ibu Santi’s home. However, a few hours before the workshop we were in-formed by the action group people that other inhabitants and the head of kampung also want to join this meeting and they decided to move the meeting to Madrasa building. We were excited to hear that more people are eager to be involved in working on their development plan. However, due to there was a praying in mosque around the same time, it turned out only 8 people came and the meeting was postponed until 20:00.

Secondly, the meeting was presented in English and translated by one facilitator afterwards, but sometimes the participants got so enthusiastic during the discussion which made the translator join the discussion. This made it hard to translate the content to the other two facilitators at the same time.


104


Figure 6.44 Results of Timeline Workshop


105



106

6.11 Other activities

Evaluation

- Evaluation with facilitatorsAfter the workshop the methodology and results were handed over to IPB and the NGO.

- Evaluation with community development program

Presentation of environment development plan - Regional workshop Puncak IPB

Questionnaires To validate the PEP workshop results we conduct 30 questionnaires in Kampung Gunung Mas (see fig-ure). In this way we get a larger sample of the Kam-pung population. The questionnaires are filled in by 50% women and 50% men of all age groups. The filled in questionnaires can be found in the appendix.

Results The results mostly correspond with the PEP work-shop results. The main environmental problem is the garbage in the kampung and the Cisampai river. The other problems mentioned are deforestation by illegal logging, garbage near houses due to lack of garbage management, and less tea production by soil degradation. In addition, there are the needs for clean open space and economic benefit from the tourists.

Interview Head of Kampung - layout of the questions- results & conclusions


Figure 6.45 Afterwards actions


107

6.12 Findings


The PEP workshop proved to be an effective re-search through designing exercise that results in ownership of the gathered knowledge by the par-ticipants. The Green Towns Workshop functioned as a sufficient guideline for the overall process. The added visual methods such as the fieldtrip photos and the ‘draw your dream’ exercise were effective at sharing findings among participants and to imagine the results and procedures of actions towards envi-ronmental development. The Photoshop workshop method provides an easy way for the participants to visualize their future living environment. This stim-ulates them to start the implementation phase. The Timeline workshop method provides a floor for the participants to think in long term. By placing the modified photos into a timeline, the participants were encouraged to think about responsible group and necessities for these actions.

As findings, kampung Gunung Mas recognizes four main environmental problems; dumping of garbage into the environment, soil degradation, deforestation and air pollution. The wishes and needs of the peo-ple are to clean the environment from garbage, to stop the illegal logging and to increase their econom-ic benefits from the environment by making their Kampung more attractive for tourists. The knowl-edge we gain by PEP workshop will be used in the landscape plan.

7. Translation


110

• What is the problem – allow the problem definition to arise from the participants (PRA) (prob-lem tree, problem map)

From research to designThe data collected in the PEP workshop and action group meetings listed the following problems.

- Garbage- Soil degradation and landslides - Lack of income

• Designing to compare data (Lenzholzer 2013) Design as accumulation (Cross 2007) RTD participatory knowledge claim (diagram of data se-lection)

Expert talk results

Emphasize on erosion control by increasing vegeta-tion and reducing the slope

Focus on labor and economic benefits

• Limitation of design – not used as blueprint but to continue transformation – give ideas – relate to GTW PS AD TL

• Synthesis – design opportunities

Chapter 7: Accumulation

Figure 7.1 Data accumulation within the research through designing process

FindingsIn this chapter, we answered how to verify the field-work result and how to bridge the data to design recommendations. As the methodology chapter out-lined, the RTD process is dominantly connected to the pragmatic knowledge claim of Creswell (2009) and aims to develop a procedural landscape design (Lenzholzer et al., 2013). From the PEP workshop and the landscape analysis we understand the envi-ronment of Kampung Gunung Mas and the wishes and needs of the community related to environmen-tal development. Based on the findings we conclude that a solution should not only confront the envi-ronmental problem, but also aim to welfare the local inhabitants and enhance the local identity. Therefore, three design subjects are decided (economic benefi-cial, social-cultural value, and environmental respon-sibility).

In order to offer comprehensive procedural land-scape design and has the potential to enable the ac-tions to address both human and natural issues, the design interventions should be familiar with the lo-cal social-cultural background and characteristics of local economic activities. Hence, additional research on economic benefit, social-cultural value, and envi-ronmental responsibility are conducted to get fully understanding about the local experience, and to find information needed to continue developing design


111

Chapter 7: Accumulation

Figure 7.2 Presentation in the Indonesian Embassy

principles.

The method research for design was used based on post positivism and qualitative research. The over-all RTD process, the fieldwork result, the landscape analysis result, and additional research result are ac-cumulated into design principles which help the in-habitants to generate future actions.

8. Design


114

Home garden

Shade

Fish pond Complex forest garden

Small square

Tea plantation

Socializing

Chapter 8: Design

8.1 Design process

As we stated in Chapter 4, the procedural landscape design (Lenzholzer et al., 2013) here is not meant as blueprints but an expression of a common vi-sion to the future. The goal of the procedural land-scape design is trying to address the primary needs of communities at the mean time mitigate negative environmental consequences caused by urbanization. In this chapter, to get comprehensive design princi-ples, the design process started with combining the results from the workshop (Problem map, problem tree, environmental development plan, Photoshop photos, and the implementation timeline) and the landscape analysis. As results, three design subjects are decided (economic beneficial, social-cultural val-ue, and environmental responsibility). Based on the findings we conclude that a solution should not only confront the environmental problem, but also aim to welfare the local inhabitants and enhance the local identity. However, we found out we were missing the essential information about how landscape features work in relation to local experience. Hence, addition-

Figure 8.1 Economic activities in Gunung Mas (based on workshop results and observation)

Figure 8.2 Socul-cultural perspective (Based on workshop results and observation)

al researches in three subjects (economic beneficial, social-cultural value, and environmental responsibil-ity) are conducted. As results, five design principles are generated (reuse of garbage, composting, open space, terrace, and planting trees). By plot the advan-tages and disadvantages of different design princi-ples in a matrix, the integration of different design principles are suggested. Afterwards, an implementa-tion strategy on two kampung regional scale is sug-gested. The design principles are formulated based on additional researches based on local experiences. Thus, the outcomes should be easy implementable and manageable.

In this chapter the following sub questions will be addressed:How to translate these research results into land-scape design principles for various scale levels within the Kampung?How to implement these landscape design principles on various scale levels in Kampung Gunung Mas?

8.2 Research for design outcomesLooking at the landscape from an economic per-spective, we found the landscape in Gunung Mas is the location where economic plants take place (such as the tea plantation). The soil, water, and organic material are the basic resource. The spatial order of landscape can help to protect these resourc-es and production, such as shelterbelts, terraces (Duchhart, 1992). Indonesian has the home garden (Pekarangan) the mix garden and tree plantation (Kebun-talun) traditional agroforestry systems (Soemarwoto, 1984). In Gunung Mas, some of the

Figure 8.3 Design fucus of sustainable production and mutliple use of nature resources flow (adapted from Overview of agroforestry sys-tems in southeast Asia, 2014)


115

Chapter 8: Design

Figure 8.4 Recycle

Figure 8.5 Composting

Figure 8.6 Multi-functional open space

Figure 8.7 Terrace

Figure 8.8 Plant trees

8.3 Design principlesinhabitants have their home garden which contains variety of species, herbal medicines, vegetables, fruits, fuel wood and fish (see figure 8.1). As con-clusion, there is the potential to develop the tradi-tional home garden system and mix garden system to covers the landscape as an important source for variety of agricultural production and home garden products.

From a social-cultural perspective, the landscape in Gunung Mas acts as a place for socializing (see figure 8.2). Based on the observations, we found that people look for confident place to be (such as in clean small square, in the shade). The spatial arrangement of landscape can either encourage or block social activities. In Gunung Mas, the location of garbage bin hampers social life of the inhabit-ants. After a heavy working day, the long distance for throwing waste becomes overwhelming burden. Therefore, the garbage dumping is happening in the kampung where the social activities were also block by the garbage. In addition, the Indonesian also has a tradition of reusing different materials (Mazumdar & Mazumdar, 2012). In sum, there is the poten-tial to contain variety of social-cultural activities by cleaning the garbage dumping areas within the Kampung and planning the garbage management system the outdoor space.

On the environmental perspective, the landscape mainly offers resources on two aspects: one re-lates to the nature process, and the other relates to human physiological. The nature law and forces can also be put into possible (such as nutrient cycles) and negative (such as landslide, fuel wood shortage) results (Duchhart 1992). Therefore, it is important to find the balance that the two aspects contribute to each other (see figure 8.3). Due to the steep slope angle, and the soil type the upper land is very erosion vulnerable erosion. Reforestation to increase the vegetation cover is vital to decrease run-off and sedimentation. In addition, the agroforestry is an excellent choice of land use to minimize soil erosion rates (Kusumanari & Michell, ).

In conclusion, the design recommendation should find the potential of reusing garbage and start from the primary needs from house hold by creating open space for socializing and developing agrofor-estry traditional home garden and mix garden. In the following paragraph, the five design principles area formulated based on the research outcomes.


116

Chapter 8: Design

8.3.1 Advantages and limitations of all design interventions

To determine the practicability of the design princi-ples we determine the advantages and limitations of each principle (see figure 8.9). This gives us a clear overview which principles enhance which one of the three categories. The goal is develop spatial integrat-ed solutions and therefore we aim to combine several design principles. In this way the design will be more

Figure 8.9 Matrix comparing the advantages and disadvantages of design principles (Based on Soil and water conservation approaches, 2014)

comprehensive and solutions solve more problems at once.


117

Chapter 8: Design


118

Chapter 8: Design

8.3.2 Spatial relationsThe figure above illustrates the spatial relationship and benefit of the different design principles.

Trees on the benches of terraces:

- erosion control- water run off control- reduce slope length- improve soil fertility- production of fruit, wood, and grass

Trees along the river:

- erosion control- provide shade and decoration- production of fruit, wood

Composting:

- compost generates nutrients for crops

Figure 8.10 Spatial relation of different design principles (adapted from Iskandar, 1980)


119

Composting:

- compost generates nutrients for crops

Chapter 8: Design

Garbage reuse:

- composting- construction materials - products to sell to tourists

Reforestation:

- answer to illegal logging- erosion control- water run-off control- improve soil fertility


120

8.3.3Recycling

Chapter 8: Design

From the PEP workshop and landscape analysis, we understand that garbage problem is one of the main environmental problems. By recycling their garbage the community can change problems into opportuni-ties. From the decompose timeline (Decay rates and celeration, 2012), the durability factor of different garbage is shown. Based on this timeline, the gar-bage is mainly separated into three categories, the organic waste (kitchen scraps, livestock manure), the recyclables (plastic bottle, tire), and the unrecycla-ble (buttery, metal). For the organic waste, by com-posting their organic waste they can improve their household cycle and the productivity of agricultural land. Plastic bottles can be utilized in different ways. Such as planters for flowers to make the Kampung more attractive for tourists. Or they can be reused in construction of walls or parts of terraces. The same counts for old motor cycle tires, which are evident in Kampung Gunung Mas. People can reuse old tires to construct walls and parts of terraces.

2 to 10 days

2 to 5 months

2 to 5 months

3 to 14 months

1 to 12 years

59 to 80 years

15 to 1000 years

Does not decompost

10 days

Figure 8.11 Garbage decompose timeline (adapted from Decay rates and celeration, 2012)Photos 8.11.1-8.11.4 (serveral sources)

3months

275 years

2.7 years

27years

2,750years

27,500years

8.11.1 Composting

8.11.2 Reuse of tires for terrace construction

8.11.3 Reuse of plastic bags for commercial products

8.11.4 Reuse of plastic bottles for construction


121

8.3.4 Composting

Chapter 8: Design

Figure 8.12 Two steps composting (adapted from Provident Living, 2014)

From the PEP workshop, composting was proposed by the participants as one of the solutions in their development plan. To find an easy way to maintain the composting within their home garden, the figure above illustrates a method.

The Kitchen scraps and livestock manure are emp-tied once-a-day into the Compost Bucket. Lightly cover with garden soil to prevent flies and smells. A small coal-shovel and a bag of soil is kept next to the Compost Bucket. A lid is kept on the Compost Buck-et to prevent access by rats. Once-a-week, empty the compost bucket into the compost box, and cover with green-waste (leaves, weeds). The composting needs to be covered well to prevent insects, animals or smells. In addition, the compost box needs to be moist but not too wet (Provident living, 2014). Occa-sionally turn compost to mixture.


122

Play badminton

Sell goods

Chapter 8: Design

8.3.5 Multi-functional open space

From the PEP workshop, questionnaires and our observations we understand that social activities out-doors are of great importance for the community of Kampung Gunung Mas. By introducing a new garbage management system, former garbage dump sites become vacant and have potential to become multi-functional open spaces i.e. they are made suit-able for different social activities as the figure to the right explains.

Figure 8.13 Social-cultural activities in Gunung Mas (based on Observation)


123

Socialize

Wedding ceremony

Dry laundry

Chapter 8: Design


124

8.3.6 Terracing

As chapter 5 outlined, the inhabitants in Puncak area has a tradition of building and cultivating terrace. Terrace is also proved as one of the best soil erosion control method (Humanity Development Library, 2014). Therefore, we propose to construct terrac-es at the edge of the tea plantations and the river. The terraces will help to reduce the slope length and therefore reduce the amount of erosion. The area is currently used for small-scale agriculture that has productivity losses due to erosion and landslides.

Based on the Classifiation of terraces and selection criteria (Food and Agriculture Organization of Unit-ed Nations), the intermittent terrace was selected. The advantages of this type of terraces are:

Figure 8.14 Cross-sectional view of intermittent terraces (Food and Agriculture Organization of United Nations, 2014)

Chapter 8: Design

- Protect sloping land with a simple terracing system - Be suitable for physical slope condition from 7% to 25% (around 20% in Gunung Mas)- Consume about one-third labor cost for full bench terracing - Be suitable for mix farming, and flexible for future land use


125

8.3.7 Plant trees

Figure 8.15 Positive effects of vegetation (Adapted from Duchhart, 1992, p.27)

Chapter 8: Design

Trees have multiple positive effects (see figure 8.). It’s important to find the trees already in Puncak, in order to adapted to the current ecosystem. In addition, to place the right tree at the right location hedgerow and reforestation are the two propose principles. In the following paragraph , the planting location of trees and species will be explained.

(The trees mentioned came from different sources namely: Narendra, 2013, p. 519, Marten, 1986, P.141 and Duchhart, 1992, P. 177)

Rainfall

Evapotranspiration

NuturientsDrainage

Nuturients

Litter

Nutrientssoil protection

Wood production

Food production

Wind/dust

Shelter


126

Chapter 8: Design

Hedgerows

By planting trees in row along the contour line, hedgerow functions as one of the simplest erosion control approach. To enhance the economic bene-fit, annuals, perennial crops are planted in between the hedgerows. Hedgerows help improve soil fertility and crop production in between (Human develop-ment library, 2014).

Reforestation

Reforestation is to replant trees at the edge of the tea plantations and rainforest. These areas are now vic-tim of illegal logging but after the terraces the supply for fuelwood is more close to the Kampung. The tree siblings can be found in the rainforest and transport-ed to the edge by the men of the Kampung.

The community also desires to make their Kampung more attractive for tourists to be able to get a better income. Planting of ornamental plants can help to achieve this. At the same time plants can be planted along the street to prevent water runoff.

Vegetation criteria

The table on the right explains what local species are

Figure 8.16 Cross-sectional view of hedgerow tree planting along contour line of terrace (Adapted from Humanity Development Library, 2014)

Cultivation land Tree planting on edge of terrace

Tree planting on edge of terrace

suitable for which purpose. The species that are suit-able for food, fuelwood and construction material will be used for the terrace and the ornamental and medicinal plants are designated to the Kampung.

Apart from the human factor (for ornamentals, food, mecdicinals, fuelwood, construction wood) some abiotic and biotic factors also need to be consider as follows:

-efficient nuturient pumps-seeds should be easily available-rootsystem and rootgrowth have erosion control ef-fect-rate of litter fall and litter decomposition should have positive effects upon the soil

For example, Clitoria laurifolia has strong advantage on developing rootsystem on terrace, and Indigofera endecaphylla is suitable for tea plantation area as one of the strong benched plants with many rooting of-shoots (Duchhart, 1992, P. 173).


127

Chapter 8: Design

Ornamentals

Food (Fruits, vegetables, Spices)

Medicinals

Building materialsand fuelwood

Vegetation species

Function

Lagerstroemia speciosa

Swietenia mahagoni

Parkia speciosa

Albizzia falcata

Senna siamea

Indigofera hiesuta

Indigofera endecaphylla

Mikania scandens

Clitoria laurifolia

Calliandra calothyrsus

Gmelina arborea

Perseu america (advocado)

Musa (banana)

Acacia auriculiformis

Rubrum piperis (Chili pepper)

Bambuseae (Bamboo)

Pengelasan saintifik (Dedap)

Manihot esculenta crantz(Cassava)

Cosmos caudatus (Randa midang)

Hydrangea macrophylla

Table 8.1 List of vegetation appropriate in Gunung Mas with functions (Adapt from Narendra, 2013, p. 519, Marten, 1986, P.141 and Duchhart, 1992, P. 177)


128

Chapter 8: Design

Figure 8.17 Bottles fiiled with compressed sand, give strenth similar to concrete and conneted through crossing steel wire gauze

Figure 8.18 Reuse of plastic bottle for contruction in practice (Basel Janitors, 2014)

Figure 8.19 Staking tires with banboo

Figure 8.20 Reuse of tires for terraces contruction in practice (Flickrhivemind, 2014)


129

Chapter 8: Design

Figure 8.22 Cross section of terrace with tires and plastic bottles as construction materials (water flow analysis adapted from Door-newaard, 1991, P.56)

From figure 8.17 to 8.23, the construction details area shown. The terrace also provides as an output for larger non-organic garbage. For example tires and plastic bottles filled with sand can be used to build the terrace walls (figure 8.17-8.20). Then a part of the compost produced by the households can be used to cultivate vegetables and trees for fuelwood. The terrace beds have a 1% slope to gullies that help to direct the water runoff (figure 8.21-8.22). This will relieve the pressure on the terrace walls after heavy rainfall. The tires will also be staked by bamboo sticks fixed in the ground. This will also help increase the durability of the terrace. Based on the water level change, the least safty distance between terrace and river is analyzed (figure 8.24).

Figure 8.21 The reverse slope of a bench is 5%, and the slop along the contour is 1% to make sure the water flows in the right direction (Adapted from Humanity Development Library, 2014)

Figure 8.23 Cross-sectional view of intermittent terraces development during time, tires and plastic bottles become part of the nature terrace in the future

Figure 8.24 Least safety distance from river bank to terrace (based on observation results)

Water level during rain in rain season

Least safety terrace construction distance from river bank around 1m

Normal water level


130

Chapter 8: Design

Working from 7am until 15pmMonday to Saturday

Working from 7am until 15pmMonday to Saturday

Studying from 7am till 11amMonday to Friday

Based on The Indonesia Family Life Survey (IFLS) (2014) and our observations we found that a Sundanese household has five family members on average (i.e. parents and three childern). Some of the families include one or two elderly people as well.

At least one member of the family in Kampung Gunung Mas is working on the tea plantation from 7am till 15pm, from Monday to Saturday. The children have class in SDN (primary school) from 7am till 11am, from Monday to Friday.

Composting takes about 10 minutes per day. This can be done by the parents in their free time. The trash collection can be done by young men after school. They can be reponsible for the garbage

Figure 8.25 Family member (Based on Indonesia Family life Survey, 2014)

management and ask small funds for taking out the trash of others. Also they can seperate the garbage and help constructing the terraces. The terraces will be beneficial to the whole community. Therefore we propose this as a long-term project that can be conducted collectively on Sundays.

The next step is to determine a landscape design strategy on various scale levels to achieve spatial coherence between the design principles. We understand from the landscape analysis and observations that the house unit is a very important scale level. People have closed cycles in their household and can help improve the collective garbage management by recycling their household garbage.


131

Father

Time6 am

8 pm

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday

Mother

Children

Work or study time

Free time

Table 8.2 Time schedule of different family menbers (Based on interview with head of kampung)

Chapter 8: Design


132

House unit Street scale Kampung scale

Figure 8.26 Scale change

8.4 Design strategy

8.4.1 House unit scale Looking at the house unit scale, through imple-menting of these design principles, the meaning for everyday life of an inabitant in Gunung Mas will change. By cleaning the garbage in Kampung there will be more open space for socializing. By reuseing of garbage, some of the recycled garbage could be collected as construction materials for terrace, some could also be made into commerical products for extra income from the tourists. By using compost-ing fertilizer, there will be better food and fuel wood production in their home garden and terrace. When the majority of households does the same, the small household cycles will have significant impact on the garbage management of the entire Kampung.

8.4.2 Street scaleLooking at the street scale, planting ornamental plants near entrance and along street makes the kampung environment more attractive.

8.4.3 Kampung scaleAt the Kampung scale, the combinations of dif-ferent design principles are on site implemented in different areas. The location is supported by the

problem map and environmental development plan. The area turned out to suffer from the problems, besides; there is the need for social-cultural activities in this area. By cleaning the current garbage dump-ing sites, there is the potential to change the open space into multi-functional open space. Through planting trees at the edge of the tea plantations and rainforest, the tea plantation is protected from soil erosion risk. Planting ornamental plants at the kampung entance and along the street helps to make kampung more attractive for tourists at the same time prevent water runoff. The terraces are located in between the tea plantation and the river close to the garbage separation location. By planting trees on the edge of terrace and reduce the slope pres-sure, the water runoff and soil erosion from the tea plantation will be controlled. The landscape plan for these areas is shown in figure 8.28. In paragraph 8.5 the design will be explained in detail for four differ-ent sites.

8.4.4 Institutional embeddingThrough the workshop and afterwards activities, the institutional embedding is built among the kampung inhabitants, Tea Company, IPB University, and the local NGO.


133

Figure 8.27 Garbage materials flow in house unit scale

For the future implementation of the development plan,The Tea Company plays an important role in deci-sion making and financial support.The IPB University could play as technical sup-porter or the one who brings different stakeholders together.The local NGO could act as motivator and facilita-tor.

For the inhabitants, all of them are responsible for maintenance. They have to work together when areas of responsibilities overlap, for example the terrace and reforestation. For the specific tasks, the Action Group could organize this through kampung meetings. As an example young boy groups were used for collecting garbage. To get them function properly the help of the Tea Company and NGO is needed. In paragraph 8.5 the design will be ex-plained in detail with the aim, the possible responsi-ble group and the necessities.


134

Chapter 8: Design

1

3

4

Figure 8.28 Design pilot area with the locations of the four visualized parts

8.5 Detail designs


135

Chapter 8: Design

Mosque

Residential building

Fish pond

Tea plantation

Forest

Tourist service building

Open space

Home garden

Composting

Garbage collection

Gatbage bin

Terrace

2


136

90cm

90cm

150cm

(Google, 2014)

Chapter 8: Design

Figure 8.29 Area 1: Kampung center

Figure 8.30 Artistic impression of composting behind residential house

Figure 8.31 Composting box (Kompos Keranjang Takatura, 2011)

10m


137

Chapter 8: Design

Figure 8.32 Artistic impression of kampung center along main street

Figure 8.33 Reuse of plastic bottle in practice (Green diary, 2014) Figure 8.34 Reuse of plastic bottle in practice (Fanphobia, 2014)

Figure 8.35 Reuse of plastic bottle by steps (Adapted from Lipsticka-ndchopsticks, 2014)

Aim: Using garbage as an opportunity to get more eco-nomic benefit.

Who´s responsible: By separate and reuse garbage within their house-hold the kampung inhabitants receive the benefit directly. The local NGO could facilitate during the composting box making process.

Necessities:Composting box can be constructed from wood.


138

Chapter 8: Design

Open space

Figure 8.36 Area 2: Multi-functional open space

Figure 8.37 Cross section of multi-functional open space

10m

A

A'A'


139

Figure 8.38 Artistic impression of multi-functional open space

Chapter 8: Design

Open space

A'

Aim: After the new management system is brought into action, the former garbage dump sites will have opportunities to be designed as spaces with various purposes.

Who´s responsible: Action group convenes community in cleaning day.Kampung inhabitants provide menpower to clean the current garbage sites.

Necessities:Garbage bags can be supplied by local NGO.


140

Chapter 8: Design

Figure 8.39 Current garbage dumping sites

Figure 8.40 Artistic impression of one open space

Figure 8.41 Current situation

Figure 8.42 Location of the open space


141

Chapter 8: Design

oreri odit








142

Chapter 8: Design

Cultivation landTree planting on the edge

Figure 8.50 Cross section of terracing river banks

Figure 8.49 Area 3: Terracing river banks

A

A

A'


143

Chapter 8: Design

Recycle garbage separation

A'

Aim: The terrace at the river bank is designed for multiple purposes according to different design principles. The main concept revolves around the aim to raise economic benefit for the Kampung community. They stated that their wish was to make a better income while at the same time protecting the envi-ronment.

Who´s responsible: With this measure the tea company also benefits because the tea plantation will be less damaged by erosion. Therefore tea company can be involved in by providing some old materials that can be used in

the construction of the terrace.

Necessities:The collected household garbage will be separated by teenagers at the open space near the terrace. The additional compost is also brought to this place to fertilize the terrace. Garbage separation bins can be constructed from wood.

5m


144

Chapter 8: Design

Figure 8.52 Artistic impression of terracing river banks

Figure 8.51 current river banks

The upper edge of the terrace can be planted with erosion control species Calliandra calothyrsus. The species is known to rehabilitate erosion-prone areas by its widespread root system. The tree is a good firewood species because it is fast growing, multi-stemmed, easy to regenerate and thornless. Currently people cut trees from the rainforest uphill for collecting fuelwood. This causes erosion in the adjacent landscape units downhill (i.e. tea plantation, Cisampai river). The yields from Calliandra caloth-yrsus can be collected close to home and there is no longer need to do logging in the rainforest. The participants in the PEP workshop also indicated they want to plant Calliandra species for collecting fuelwood. An extra benefit is its ornamental qual-ity, its beautiful red ‘powder puff ’ flowers make it attractive for tourists who pass by on the tea route. The terrace beds can be planted with a mixture of the food producing species as listed in table 8.1.


145

Chapter 8: Design

0.9m

1.5m

Figure 8.53 Current situation of abandoned space near river banks

Figure 8.55 Artistic impression of garbage collection and sepa-ration site

Figure 8.54 Garbage separation facility

Plastic pottle Tire Other waste


146

Chapter 8: Design

Figure 8.56 Area 4: Kampung entrance

Figure 8.57 Artistic impression of Kampung entrance

10m

Aim: Create an attractive kampung by planting ornamental plants along streetUse garbage as materials to make commercial products.

Who´s responsible: Kampung inhabitants

Necessities:Seeds and recyclable garbage


147

Chapter 8: Design

8.6 Design implementation in time frame

Following the results from Timeling workshop, the landscape plan is divided into four steps: cleaning and maintaining, composting and planting, terrace building and cultivating, and sharing with the neigh-bourhood kampung (see figure 8.58-8.62).

First, by cleaning the current duming sites there are more spaces for social-culturl activities.

Second, the garbage separation, composting, and planting plants (both in home garden and reforest-ation location)are implemented. By selling orna-mental plants and commntial products (made by garbage) to the tourists the inhabiants gain more income as preparation for the next step.

Third, the terraces are built to protected the tea planation, prevent soil erosion, at the mean time prevent illegal logging through planting wood pro-duction trees along the teraces.

Fourth, implement the regional garbage collection system.

8.7 Conclusion

In this chapter we tried to answer the sub research questions relating to the implementation of land-scape design principles on various scale levels in Kampung Gunung Mas. The function of the different design principles is explained together with the implementation drawings, the function of reuse of garbage, composting, open space, terrace, and planting trees are mentioned. In addition, the advantages and disadvantages of different design principles are plotted in a matrix. Based on this matrix, the integration of different design principles was decided. For the house unit scale, the reuse of garbage and composting are included in order to re-duce the garbage dumping in kampung, which also creates opportunity for the multi-functional open space. For the street scale, the interventions include

planting trees, open space, and reuse of garbage. For the kampung scale, the interventions include terrace, open space, reuse of garbage, and planting trees. The implementation of design principles in this chapter should address the primary needs of communities at the mean time try to mitigate nega-tive environmental consequences caused by urbani-zation.

There will be more open space for social-cultural activities:-Clean the current garbage-Reuse and composting reduce the amount of gar-bage need to be collected -Garbage collection system prevent littering activi-ties

The soil quality will be better:-Erosion control through terraces-Reforestation-Hedgerows along terraces

The kampung will be more attractive:-Planting trees and ornamental plants near entrance and along street-Clean and well maintain kampung environment

The Kampung will be more self-sufficient:-Economic benefit from composting-Extra income through translating garbage into commercial products-Better food, tea, wood production from both home garden and terraces

In sum, ecologically, this development plan reduces the amount of waste and multiplly uses the nature resource. Economically, it increases the carrying capacity of the ecosystem and gives a long-term livelihood to the inhabitants. Psychologically, the kampung inhabitants are able to relate to these principles trough their traditional knowledge and personal experience.


148

Open space

Current garbage dumping area

Mosque

Mosque

Fish pond

Fish pond





Tea plantation

Tea plantation

Forest

Forest

Chapter 8: Design


Figure 8.59 Development plan step 1: clean the current sumping sites into open space


149

Home garden

Garbage collection

Composting

Garbage bin

Terraces

Open space

Mosque

Fish pond



Tea plantation

Forest

Home garden

Composting

Open space

Mosque

Fish pond



Tea plantation

Forest

Chapter 8: Design

Figure 8.60 Development plan step 2: Private composting complement with home garden

Figure 8.61 Development plan step 3: Garbage separation and terrace building along river banks


150

Recycle garbage

Extra waste

Extra waste

Chapter 8: Design

Figure 8.62 Development plan step 4: Development plan sharing with neighbours Kampung Rawadulangand garbage collection system


151

Extra waste

Recycle garbage

Extra waste

Garbage truck route

Recycle garbage

Garbage collection route

Home garden

Garbage collection

Composting

Garbage bin

Terraces

Open space

Mosque

Fish pond



Tea plantation

Forest

Chapter 8: Design


152


153

9. Conclusion & Discussion


154

Chapter 9: Conclusion & discussion

In this thesis we show an example of how local com-munities in Puncak can actively plan and enhance their living environment. In the process we adopted the Green Towns approach to Indonesia and made the addition of photos taken by the participants, draw your dream, the timeline workshop and com-munication through social media. This thesis report concludes by answering the main research question. This answer is derived from the answers to the sub research questions.

1. What landscape processes form the current landscape of Puncak and Kampung Gunung Mas?

The landscape of Puncak is characterized by the fertile yet erosion sensitive volcanic soils, due to its foothills of volcano location. Puncak is planned as a conservation zone for the downstream area of Jakar-ta. However, the fast-growing tourism sector increas-es the number of urban nits and villas. Kampung Gunung Mas is located on the edge of this conser-vation area and faces environmental degradation be-cause of increasing tourism and external influences. Five landscape units are recognized in Guung Mas, i.e. rainforest on the steep slopes, tea planation, steam valleys, villas in the tourist area and the kam-pung centre .Due to heavy rainfall in the monsoon and the valley location of the Kampung, water is al-ways present.

2. What are the main social and economic princi-ples of the Kampung Gunung Mas community?

The community of Kampung Gunung Mas is rela-tively homogeneous. Families consist of five mem-bers on average and both parents work for the tea plantation. The household is a self-sufficient system for the large part and uses closed cycles for feed-ing livestock. Natural resources are exploited in the form of small-scale agriculture and illegal logging for collecting fuelwood. Social activities happen mostly outdoors and consist of sharing food, playing sports, selling goods, ceremonies and chatting. The commu-

nity is very close with each other as many people are born in Kampung Gunung Mas and lived here all their lives. This helps the community to encourage each other to work together (Gotong Royong in Ba-hasa Indonesia).

3. What are the environmental problems and wishes and needs of the people of Kampung Gunung Mas?

From the PEP workshop and action group meetings we learn that the community of Kampung Gunung Mas recognizes four main environmental problems; dumping of garbage into the environment, soil deg-radation, deforestation and air pollution. The wishes and needs of the people are to clean the environ-ment from garbage, to stop the illegal logging and to increase their economic benefits from the environ-ment by making their Kampung more attractive for tourists.

4. What adaptations can be made to the Green Towns approach in order to encourage and maintain transformations in Kampung commu-nities?

In this thesis we bring the Green Towns approach to Indonesia for the first time and we adopted it by using visual methods throughout the whole partici-patory process. Hand drawings of Indonesian exam-ples helped the participants to get acquainted with the PEP workshop. The integration of photography as a research method seems to bridge the gap from plan to implementation and assure further continua-tion as a result of the Timeline workshop. The addi-tion of a small drawing exercise to the environment development plan helps to stimulate the participants to think about beautification. At the time this report is written the community of Kampung Gunung Mas organized three more action days and got financial support from the tea company. The adjacent Kam-pung Rawa Dulang held similar action days. This shows that Kampung Gunung Mas is in transforma-tion and it stimulates other communities to be part

9. Conclusion


155


of it.

5. How to translate these research results into landscape design principles for various scale lev-els within the Kampung?

Based on the findings from EP workshop we learnt that a solution should not only confront the envi-ronmental problem, but also aim to welfare the local inhabitants and enhance the local identity. Therefore, three design subjects are decided, economic benefi-cial, social-cultural value, and environmental respon-sibility. In order to offer comprehensive landscape design and has the potential to enable the actions to address both human and natural issues, the de-sign interventions should be familiar with the local social-cultural background and characteristics of lo-cal economic activities. Hence, additional research on economic benefit, social-cultural value, and envi-ronmental responsibility are conducted to get fully understanding about the local experience. As results, the wished and needs of the community are repre-sented by five main landscape design principles: re-using of garbage, composting, multi-functional open spaces, terrace, planting trees.

6. How to implement these landscape design principles on various scale levels in Kampung Gunung Mas?

To get the most from these design principles, the advantages and disadvantages of different design principles are plotted in a matrix. Based on this matrix, the integration of different design principles was decided. For the house unit scale, the reuse of garbage and composting are included in order to re-duce the garbage dumping in kampung, which also creates opportunity for the multi-functional open space. For the street scale, the interventions include planting trees, open space, and reuse of garbage. For the kampung scale, the interventions include terrace, open space, reuse of garbage, and planting trees. The implementations of these design princi-ples on three scale levels in this way complement

each other on economic, socio-cultural and environ-mental perspectives.

How can a landscape-based design approach help local Kampung communities in Puncak to come to integrated spatial solutions to local en-vironmental problems? First, the landscape-based design approach must be made suitable for the local context of Puncak. It must be noted that participation in the landscape-based design approach is of utmost importance. In Indo-nesia it proves to be of great additional value when civil society gets the opportunity to actively plan and design its living environment.

Second, before the present study the step towards long-term development was not elaborated well in the Green Towns approach. This study shows how by visual methods the workshop becomes more transformative by providing increased ownership and the ability to share photos as objects of discus-sion. By taking this approach the study also aimed to further embed the Photoshop Workshop of Berg-stra & Hornman (2013) into the Green Towns ap-proach. A finding of this research is that the effects of visual methods must not be underestimated. It is said that one picture tells more than one thousand words. This proved true for this study. The workshop method gained clarity by explaining the exercises by example drawings and videos. In addition, by incor-porating the Timeline workshop in the Green Towns approach, the participants are encouraged to think of steps for long-term development. The result is a timeline of consecutive actions which can be shared among community members. This relates to the ul-timate of three basic components of PRA research; participatory methods, behaviour and attitudes and sharing.

Third, the project was embedded on the academic level and local non-governmental level, this combi-nation showed its quality. The strong structure of a higher level institution of a university is necessary


156

to provide organizational weight to the project. The local NGO is necessary to gain trust with the local community and to be able to build a stakeholder net-work. An institutional embedding as this seems indis-pensable for external researchers who want to repli-cate such research in Indonesia. The Green Towns Workshop was used as a starting point for the partic-ipatory environmental planning workshop. With help from our collaborating partners of IPB and Ciliwung Institute we adopted the program to meet local re-quirements. For example, we replaced the example videos, explained the exercises through drawings and adjusted the schedule to working hours and Muslim praying times.

Forth, the role of the landscape architect shifted from an individual designer to a facilitator who guides a participatory design process and to a participant. Af-ter the fieldwork the landscape architect again takes an independent role and accumulates the gathered data into the act of creatively designing. By feeding the design back to the participants, the community receives new ideas on which they can build their de-sired environment. As such this gives the designer new input for the procedural design (see figure 9.1). Fifth, the integrated spatial solutions as proposed by the participants are represented by five main land-scape design principles: reusing of garbage, com-posting, multi-functional open spaces, terrace, plant-ing trees. By integrated spatial solutions we mean that these solutions need to address different landscape subsystems as explained in the socio-physical organ-ization model. The design is not a blueprint but an expression of a common vision to the future.

By the end of this thesis we can state that the re-search approach did not only cause transformation in the community of Kampung Gunung Mas. We as landscape architects were engaged in the change-ori-ented processes. Through participation in and facil-itating of environmental planning we learned great deals of ourselves as well.


157


158


Figure 9.1 Afterwards recommendations


159



160

General discussion

Due to the case selection in the rural areas of Java, data availability was often limited. Therefore this re-search and its conclusions are for a large part drawn from subjective findings. These findings are for the large part made by the participants of Kampung Gunung Mas. To the limited availability of data, our own knowledge and interpretations may have influ-enced the data collection and selection process. In addition, due to the language barrier we needed help from the NGO or IPB to translate data in the field, in this way the data was interpreted by various people and decreases the objectivity of this research.

Green Towns approach

We adapted Green Towns approach to ‘participatory environmental planning workshop’ or simply ‘PEP workshop’. For Indonesia specifically we may call it ‘Gotong Royong’ which means ‘working togeth-er’. This displays the essence of transformative ap-proach. Due to the language barrier, the workshop in Indonesia was at times a challenge. There were some misunderstanding between us and the other facilita-tors. In the end this did not matter much because the results are satisfying. We recommend making a communication signal (i.e. Words cards to inform the left time) within the facilitators during the workshop and involving interpreters at all times, when other re-searchers intend to replicate the PEP workshop.

Photoshop workshop

The integration of photos throughout the whole participatory process provides a new insight to the Green Towns approach. By using photos taken by the participants during Photoshop workshop, the ownership of the method increased, which helps the enthusiasm from participants continuing for the im-plementation of real actions.

Timeline workshop

This study introduced the Timeline workshop. Al-though effective in stimulating thoughts on long-term environmental development, the method can be further developed. The responsible group and ne-cessities of actions can be explained in more detail, and then the timeline can become a proposal to the other stakeholders.

Design

This study was conducted as a pragmatic study with a main emphasis on social constructivism. The de-sign has a procedural character –and therefore not considered as a blueprint design. Although this led to several integrated spatial solutions, it may be interest-ing to adopt this to a form of quantitative research to increase the practicability of the design. For exam-ple, calculations on how much presure the tires and plastic bottle can take through different construction ways.

Evaluations

The evaluations of the participatory environmental planning (PEP) process with different audiences help to further develop the research model in Indonesia. On the local level, the community of Kampung Gunung Mas mentioned that the PEP workshop was complementary to their own knowledge and that the visualization techniques such as the Photoshop Workshop and the Timeline Workshop helped to make their dreams come true. The NGO said that the PEP workshop and the landscape-based design approach provide a new toolbox they can continue to use in Kampung Gunung Mas and future projects. The staffs at IPB were amazed by the achieved re-sults in the relatively short timeframe. The landscape based design approach serves as an inspiration for their future community based deployment projects. In addition, most audiences mentioned they would like to adopt the PEP workshops to their own pref-erences, which we can say we achieved our goal by

Discussion



161

creating the knowledge ownership for different audi-ences of the PEP.

Recommendations for further research

The participatory process with Kampung Gunung Mas proved to be fruitful. Although the fascination for this study is the urbanisation of the Jakarta Met-ropolitan Area, we do not return to this scale at the end. To give guidelines on how to develop Puncak to mitigate further environmental degradation, fu-ture studies are recommended. First, this is just one of the many Kampungs in Puncak area. To fully test the effectiveness of the approach it is recommended to replicate this study for other Kampung commu-nities. Then a better set of general applicable design principles can be developed. In addition, this thesis brought some stakeholders to light in Gunung Mas. Second, the governmental structure seems to be much more complicated than we describe. Although the research focus was not to give a detailed stake-holder analysis, it is highly recommended to empha-size this in further research. Further study can elab-orate on the governmental relationships and aim to come to mutual agreement between major stakehold-ers on how this area should develop. Third, a quanti-tative research on sedimentation patterns and water flow is then necessary to determine the impact of the Puncak development plan for the downstream area.



162


163


164

References

quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Los Angeles, CA [etc.]: Sage.

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Design-ing and conducting mixed methods research. Los Angeles, CA [etc.]: SAGE.

da Silva Vieira, R., & Antunes, P. (2014). Using pho-to-surveys to inform participatory urban planning processes: Lessons from practice. [Land Use Policy]. 38, 497-508.

Doornewaard. J (1991) Dieng Highlands, Central Jave, a landscape plan for an intensively cultivated highland region in Central Java, Indonesia. M.S. thesis.

Duchhart, I. (1992). Draft lecture notes on Land-scape planning in developing countries. Wageningen University.K300-615

Duchhart, I. (2000). Introduction to Participatory Environmental Planning (PEP) for sustainable urban development. [S.l.]: Environment and Urban Devel-opment Training Project Kenya.

Duchhart, I. (2007). Designing sustainable land-scapes: from experience to theory : a process of re-flective learning from case-study projects in Kenya. (Proefschrift Wageningen. Met lit. opg. - Met samen-vatting in het Engels, Nederlands en Frans), s.n.], [S.l. Retrieved from http://edepot.wur.nl/27196

Duchhart, I., Steiner, F., & Bassman, J. H. (1989). Planning methods for agroforestry. [Agroforestry Systems]. 7(3), 227-258.

Firman, T. (2002). Urban development in Indonesia, 1990-2001: From the boom to the early reform era through the crisis. [Habitat International]. 26(2), 229-249.

Firman, T. (2004). New town development in Jakarta Metropolitan Region: A perspective of spatial segre-

Abdoellah, O. S. (1980). Structure of homegardens of Javanese and Sundanese people in Bantarkalong. (Master), Padjadjaran University, Bandung, Indonesa. Aprilia, A., Tezuka, T., & Spaargaren, G. (2012). Household Solid Waste Management in Jakarta, In-donesia: A Socio-Economic Evaluation.

Arifin, H. S., & Nakagoshi, N. (2011). Landscape ecology and urban biodiversity in tropical Indonesian cities. Landscape and Ecological Engineering, 7(1), 33-43.

Bergstra, E., & Hornman, R. (2013). Cyclone resil-ient landscape : the case of Vatomandry, Madagascar. [S.l.: s.n.].

Bizoza, A. R., & de Graaff, J. (2012). Financial cost-benefit analysis of bench terraces in Rwanda. [Land Degradation and Development]. 23(2), 103-115.

Brink, A. v. d., & Bruns, D. (2014). Strategies for Enhancing Landscape Architecture Research. Land-scape Research, 39(1), 7-20.

Brockerhoff, M. P. (2000). An urbanizing world. Pop-ulation Bulletin, 55(3), 3-43.

Buehler, M. (2010). Decentralisation and local de-mocracy in Indonesia: The marginalisation of the public sphere Problems of Democratisation in In-donesia: Elections, Institutions and Society (pp. 267-285).

Chambers, R. (1994). Participatory rural appraisal (PRA): Challenges, potentials and paradigm. World Development, 22(10), 1437-1454.

Clarke, G. T. (1985). Jakarta, Indonesia: planning to solve urban conflicts. Cities in Conflict: Planning and Management of Asian Cities, 35-38.

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design : qualitative,


165

gation. [Habitat International]. 28(3), 349-368.

Firman, T. (2009). The continuity and change in mega-urbanization in Indonesia: A survey of Jakar-ta-Bandung Region (JBR) development. Habitat In-ternational, 33(4), 327-339.

Firman, T., Surbakti, I. M., Idroes, I. C., & Simarma-ta, H. A. (2011). Potential climate-change related vul-nerabilities in Jakarta: Challenges and current status. Habitat International, 35(2), 372-378.

Fuchs, R. J. (2010). Cities at risk: Asia’s coastal cities in an age of climate change. Asia Pacific Issues(96), 1-12.

Humanity development library 2.0 (2014) Hedge-rows [ONLINE] Available at : http://www.nzdl.org/gsdlmod?e=d-00000-00---off-0hdl--00-0----0-10-0---0---0direct-10---4-----ste--0-1l--11-en-50---20-about-agroforestry+Indonesia--00-0-1-00-0--4----0-0-11-10-0utfZz-8-00&a=d&c=hdl&cl=-search&d=HASH018cfbb77d155fa06876f29b.5.10 [Accessed 16 June 14]

Humanity development library 2.0 (2014) Terraces [ONLINE] Available at :http://www.nzdl.org/gs-dlmod?e=q-00000-00---off-0hdl--00-0----0-10-0---0---0direct-10---4-----ste--0-1l--11-en-50---20-about-terrace+drainage--00-0-1-00-0--4----0-0-11-10-0ut-fZz-8-00&a=d&c=hdl&srp=0&srn=0&cl=-search&d=HASH01ddf12679fcd1bd96b4344b.4.2.4 [Accessed 16 June 14]

Humanity development library 2.0 (2014) Over-view of agroforestry systems in Southeast Asia[ONLINE]Available at: http://www.nzdl.org/gsdlmod?e=q-00000-00---off-0hdl--00-0----0-10-0---0---0direct-10---4-----ste--0-1l--11-en-50---20-about-agroforestry+Indonesia--00-0-1-00-0--4----0-0-11-10-0utfZz-8-00&a=d&c=hdl&srp=0&s-rn=0&cl=search&d=HASH018cfbb77d-155fa06876f29b.4.2 [Accessed 16 June 14]

Humanity development library 2.0 (2014) Soil and water conservation approaches [ONLINE]Available at:http://www.nzdl.org/gsdlmod?e=d-00000-00---off-0hdl--00-0----0-10-0---0---0direct-10---4-----ste--0-1l--11-en-50---20-about-agrofor-estry+Indonesia--00-0-1-00-0--4----0-0-11-10-0ut-fZz-8-00&a=d&c=hdl&cl=search&d=HASH-018cfbb77d155fa06876f29b.5 [Accessed 16 June 14]

Iskandar, J. (1980). Plant architecture and structure in the homegarden, Cihampelas Village, West Java, . M.S. thesis.

Kerkstra, K., & Vrijlandt, P. (1988). Het landschap van de zandgebieden : probleemverkenning en oplossingsrichting. Utrecht: Directie Bos- en Land-schapsbouw.

Kraak, T. (2009). Zoos in transition : thesis research about the future of zoos. [S.l.: s.n.].

Kompos Keranjang Takatura (2011) Pengolahan kompos [ONLINE] Avaliable at: http://desakuhi-jau.org/kompos-keranjang-takatura/ [Accessed 12 July 14]

Governance of flood risk management in a time of climate change: the cases of Jakarta and Rotter-dam. Environmental Politics, 22(3), 518-536. doi: 10.1080/09644016.2012.683155

Lenzholzer, S., Duchhart, I., & Koh, J. (2013). ‘Re-search through designing’ in landscape architecture. Landscape and Urban Planning, 113, 120-127.

Mazumdar, S., & Mazumdar, S. (2012). Immigrant home gardens: Places of religion, culture, ecology, and family. [Landscape and Urban Planning]. 105(3), 258-265.

Mawdsley, E. (2009). The New Global Frontier: Ur-banization, Poverty and the Environment in the 21st Century. Geografiska Annaler Series B-Human Ge-ography, 91B(4), 390-392.


166

Mc Gee, T. (2011). Distinctive urbanization in the peri-urban regions of East and Southeast Asia: re-newing the debate. Jurnal Perencanaan Wilayah dan Kota, 16(1), 39-55.

McGee, T. G., & Robinson, I. M. (1995). The me-ga-urban regions of Southeast Asia (Vol. 1): UBC Press.

Milburn, L. A. S., & Brown, R. D. (2003). The rela-tionship between research and design in landscape architecture. Landscape and Urban Planning, 64(1-2), 47-66. doi: 10.1016/s0169-2046(02)00200-1

Neolaka, A. (2012). Flood disaster risk in Jakarta, In-donesia. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the En-vironment, 159, 107-118.

Okubo, S., Parikesit, Harashina, K., Muhamad, D., Abdoellah, O. S., & Takeuchi, K. (2010). Traditional perennial crop-based agroforestry in West Java: The tradeoff between on-farm biodiversity and income. [Agroforestry Systems]. 80(1), 17-31.

Orwa C, A Mutua, Kindt R , Jamnadass R, S Antho-ny. 2009 Agroforestree Database:a tree reference and selection guide version 4.0 (http://www.worldagro-forestry.org/sites/treedbs/treedatabases.asp)

Petanideskot (2012) Membuat Compost Heap mod-el Lasagna alias Mengompos ala Kue Lapis [ON-LINE] Available at: http://petanideskot.wordpress.com/2012/03/24/membuat-compost-heap-mod-el-lasagna-alias-mengompos-ala-kue-lapis/ [Ac-cessed 16 Jume 14]

Posthumus, H., & De Graaff, J. (2005). Cost-bene-fit analysis of bench terraces, a case study in Peru. [Land Degradation and Development]. 16(1), 1-11

Provident Living (2014) Two step compost [ON-LINE] Available at: http://www.providentliving.org.nz/2-step-compost/ [Accessed 1 July 14]

Schavemaker, H. (2010). Moving the forest to the farm : the application of the green rtowns approach reshaped for the case study of the Cherangani Hills in Kenya. [S.l.: s.n.].

Steinberg, F. (2007). Jakarta: Environmental prob-lems and sustainability. Habitat International, 31(3-4), 354-365. doi: 10.1016/j.habitatint.2007.06.002

Soemarwoto, O. (1984). The talun..kebun system, a modified shifting cultivation in West Java. The Envi-ronmentalist 4:(Supplement No. 7):96-98.

Somantri, G. R. (2007). Migration within cities: a study of socio-economic processes, intra-city mi-gration, and grass-roots politics in Jakarta. Jakarta: Lembaga Penerbit, Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Indonesia.

The Indonesia Family Life Survey (IFLS) (2014) Household Survey [ONLINE] Avaliable at: http://www.rand.org/labor/FLS/IFLS.html [Accessed 16 June 14].

The precision teaching book (2012) Decay rates and celeration [ONLINE] Available at:http://thepreci-sionteachingbook.com/decay-rates-and-celeration/ [Accessed 1 July 14]

UNCHS. (1996). An urbanizing world: Global report on human settlements 1996 - UNCHS. Environment and Urbanization, 8(1), 249-251. Ward, P. J., Pauw, W. P., van Buuren, M. W., & Marfai, M. A. (2013).

Wilhelm, M. (2011). The Role of Community Resil-ience in Adaptation to Climate Change: The Urban Poor in Jakarta, Indonesia (Vol. 1).

Wirawan, I. M. A. (2010). Public Health Respons-es to Climate Change Health Impacts in Indonesia. Asia-Pacific Journal of Public Health, 22(1), 25-31. doi: 10.1177/1010539509350912


167

Yuen, B., & Kong, L. (2009). Climate change and ur-ban planning in South East Asia. Sapiens, 2(3).

Zurbrügg, C., Gfrerer, M., Ashadi, H., Brenner, W., & Küper, D. (2012). Determinants of sustainability in solid waste management - The Gianyar Waste Re-covery Project in Indonesia. [Waste Management]. 32(11), 2126-2133.


168

Figures not mentioned in this list are made by the authors.

Figure 8.3 is adapted from

Humanity development library 2.0 (2014) Overview of agroforestry systems in Southeast Asia[ONLINE]Available at: http://www.nzdl.org/gsdlmod?e=q-00000-00---off-0hdl--00-0----0-10-0---0---0direct-10---4-----ste--0-1l--11-en-50---20-about-agroforestry+Indonesia--00-0-1-00-0--4----0-0-11-10-0utfZz-8-00&a=d&c=h-dl&srp=0&srn=0&cl=search&d=HASH018cfbb77d155fa06876f29b.4.2 [Accessed 16 June 14]


Humanity development library 2.0 (2014) Soil and water conservation approaches [ONLINE]Available at:http://www.nzdl.org/gsdlmod?e=d-00000-00---off-0hdl--00-0----0-10-0---0---0direct-10---4-----ste--0-1l--11-en-50---20-about-agroforestry+Indonesia--00-0-1-00-0--4----0-0-11-10-0utfZz-8-00&a=d&c=hdl&cl=-search&d=HASH018cfbb77d155fa06876f29b.5 [Accessed 16 June 14]


Iskandar, J. (1980). Plant architecture and structure in the homegarden, Cihampelas Village, West Java, . M.S. thesis.


The precision teaching book (2012) Decay rates and celeration [ONLINE] Available at:http://theprecision-teachingbook.com/decay-rates-and-celeration/ [Accessed 1 July 14]

Figure 8.11.1

Petanideskot (2012) Membuat Compost Heap model Lasagna alias Mengompos ala Kue Lapis [ONLINE] Available at: http://petanideskot.wordpress.com/2012/03/24/membuat-compost-heap-model-lasagna-ali-as-mengompos-ala-kue-lapis/ [Accessed 16 Jume 14]

Figure 8.11.2

Flickrhivemind (2014) Reuse tires [ONLINE] Available at :https://www.flickr.com/photos/egg-role/8046234037/in/photostream/ [Accessed 1 July 14]

Figure 8.11.3

Mulanovich (2014) 4R (Reduce, Reuse, Recycle, Replace) untuk Mengurangi Sampah [ONLINE] Available at :http://mulanovich.blogspot.com/2013/10/4r-reduce-reuse-recycle-replace-mengurangi-sampah.html#ixz-z3ApGhYQwo [Accessed 16 June 14]

Figure 8.11.4

List of figures


169

Basel Janitors (2014) Innovation at Its Finest – Reduce, Reuse, Recycle [ONLINE] Available at :http://www.baseljanitors.com/2014/03/10/innovation-at-its-finest-reduce-reuse-recycle/ [Accessed 16 June 14]


Provident Living (2014) Two step compost [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.providentliving.org.nz/2-step-compost/ [Accessed 1 July 14]

Figure 8.14

Food and agriculture organization of united nations (2014) Transitional types of terraces [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.fao.org/docrep/006/ad083e/AD083e09.htm [Accessed 3 July 14]


Dchhart, I. 1992. Draft lecture notes on Landscape planning in developing countries. Wageningen University.K300-615


Humanity development library 2.0 (2014) Hedgerows [ONLINE] Available at : http://www.nzdl.org/gsdlm-od?e=d-00000-00---off-0hdl--00-0----0-10-0---0---0direct-10---4-----ste--0-1l--11-en-50---20-about-agrofor-estry+Indonesia--00-0-1-00-0--4----0-0-11-10-0utfZz-8-00&a=d&c=hdl&cl=search&d=HASH018cfbb77d-155fa06876f29b.5.10 [Accessed 16 June 14]

Figure 8.17

Based on Classifiation of terraces and selection criteria (Food and Agriculture Organization of United Na-tions), http://www.fao.org/docrep/006/ad083e/AD083e09.htm [Accessed 6 August 14]

Figure 8.18

Basel Janitors (2014) Innovation at Its Finest – Reduce, Reuse, Recycle [ONLINE] Available at :http://www.baseljanitors.com/2014/03/10/innovation-at-its-finest-reduce-reuse-recycle/ [Accessed 16 June 14]

Figure 8.20

Flickrhivemind (2014) Reuse tires [ONLINE] Available at :https://www.flickr.com/photos/egg-role/8046234037/in/photostream/ [Accessed 1 July 14]


Humanity development library 2.0 (2014) Terraces [ONLINE] Available at :http://www.nzdl.org/gsdlm-od?e=q-00000-00---off-0hdl--00-0----0-10-0---0---0direct-10---4-----ste--0-1l--11-en-50---20-about-ter-race+drainage--00-0-1-00-0--4----0-0-11-10-0utfZz-8-00&a=d&c=hdl&srp=0&srn=0&cl=search&d=HASH-01ddf12679fcd1bd96b4344b.4.2.4 [Accessed 16 June 14]


Doornewaard. J (1991) Dieng Highlands, Central Jave, a landscape plan for an intensively cultivated highland region in Central Java, Indonesia. M.S. thesis.


170


The Indonesia Family Life Survey (IFLS) (2014) Household Survey [ONLINE] Avaliable at: http://www.rand.org/labor/FLS/IFLS.html [Accessed 16 June 14].

Figure 8.31

Kompos Keranjang Takatura (2011) Pengolahan kompos [ONLINE] Avaliable at: http://desakuhijau.org/kompos-keranjang-takatura/ [Accessed 12 July 14]

Figure 8.33

Green Diary (2014) Funky yet effective uses of plastic bottles [ONLINE] Avaliable at: http://www.greendiary.com/funky-yet-effective-uses-of-plastic-bottles.html [Accessed 1 July 14]

Figure 8.34

Fanphobia (2014) Reuse plastic bottles and turn them into awesome flower pots FanPhobia [ONLINE] Aval-iable at: http://www.fanphobia.net/images/property-photos/reuse-plastic-bottles-and-turn-them-into-awe-some-flower-pots/ [Accessed 16 June 14]

Figure 8.35

Lipstickandchopsticks (2014) [ONLINE] Be Green: ReUse Plastic Bottles [ONLINE] Available at :http://www.lipstickandchopsticks.com/post/26335235565/be-green-reuse-plastic-bottles#axzz3ApGRJSmI


171

Appendix list

3 Day workshop

Facilitator training

Other activities

Photoshop workshop

Timeline workshop

Video

Green Towns Workshop videoPhotos of MapsPowerPoint (English, Bahasa)PosterProgram (English, Bahasa)Field record sheet (English, Bahasa)Invitation letterList of written on flipchartsReport of workshop (English, Bahasa)Registration form (English, Bahasa)Green Towns Workshop Diploma

PowerPoint

Evaluation form (English, Bahasa)Questionnaire (English, Bahasa)Questionnaires resultsObservation table

ProblemsSolutionPowerPoint (English, Bahasa)

PowerPointTimeline

Workshop videoKampung video


172

Date post:	03-Nov-2021
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	6 times
Download:	0 times

Gotong Royong Working Together - WUR

Documents