INFORMALITY IN CONSENSUS PLANNING ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT (TOD) IN JAKARTA METROPOLITAN AREA (STUDY CASE: THE DEVELOPMENT OF TOD ON URBANRAIL NETWORK IN JAKARTA METROPOLITAN AREA)

• Main Author: Rosalin, Astri
• Format: Dissertations
• Language: Indonesia
• Online Access: https://digilib.itb.ac.id/gdl/view/53521
• Institution: Institut Teknologi Bandung

This research discusses the informality that occurs in the development of TransitOriented Development (TOD) or development which is oriented to the transit point of the public transportation system. The definition of formal and informal approaches in this study refers to the "structure" and "agency" perspectives developed in Giddens' structuration theory. The formal approach refers to the agent's behavior within the scope of the structure whereas the informal approach refers to the agent's actions outside the scope of the structure. Informality is defined as a condition that is beyond the reach of government mechanisms at various different levels, while formality is a condition that can be reached by these mechanisms. This research will specifically highlight how informality works in consensus planning that is carried out in the development of TOD. This is highlighted in line with the similarity in the use of the consensus planning approach in a number of TOD cases in several countries in reaching planning agreements. TOD is an approach to developing a sustainable transportation system through integration with land use development that involves the development of a number of infrastructures. TOD has been developed in various countries since the early 90's. This concept has also been adopted and developed in Indonesia since 2012, along with the development of rail-based mass transportation systems such as the MRT and LRT. However, TOD planning in Indonesia experiences a number of problems due to different contexts in efforts to adopt and implement success in other countries so that until now the TOD area has not been realized in Indonesia. The difference in context raised in this study is the informality that occurs in the planning and implementation process of the TOD area. In general, TOD development is loaded with a consensus process between stakeholders to produce a development agreement. Planning through a consensus process based on decision-making through a communicative planning approach, which emphasizes achieving planning agreement through debate, communication and interaction between actors. One of the theories of consensus planning by Johan Woltjer raised in this study was developed based on the case of infrastructureviii development planning in the Netherlands through a communicative approach, in the form of a combination of patterns of collaboration, negotiation, and persuasion. However, generally the success of this consensus process occurs in a formal context marked by a series of government policy interventions, so that this theory cannot explain how the consensus process occurs in the context of informality, especially in the case of TOD development. On the other hand, formality has a rigid nature that limits actors to act, whereas informality has the nature of flexibility that allows actors to develop actions or strategies to fulfill their interests outside the structure. These strengths and weaknesses are important to reveal and explain in relation to consensus planning. Therefore the research then aims to explain how informality works and affects the consensus planning that occurs in the development of TOD, and therefore this research is important to do. This research raises a case study for the development of the TOD area which was carried out in 4 (four) railway projects in Metropolitan Jakarta which have been running since 2012 and have entered the development stage so that it is possible to research them, compared to other TOD projects in Indonesia that are not yet developed enough. The main stakeholders identified as agents in the case study include the central government, local governments, transit agencies and developers who have a major stake and influence in planning decision-making. The main research question posed is how informality influences the consensus planning that occurs in TOD development. The study used qualitative methods with semi-structured interview techniques and data from several FGDs, supported by secondary data in the form of a review of policies and regulations, as well as sources from company websites and media news. The theoretical framework developed based on structuration theory divides the action arena into 2 (two) arenas, namely the formal arena and the informal arena. The depiction of these two arenas is used to show the horizontal relationship between arenas, what is the choice of arena for each agent and how it acts in each arena. In order to operationalize the theoretical framework, this study also developed an analytical framework based on Institutional Analysis Development (IAD) by Ostrom to be able to see more sharply the vertical relationship between the arenas of action. The developed Adapted IAD (AIAD) analytical framework will explain each agent's actions into 4 (four) levels of action vertically, namely the operational level, collective choice, constitutional and meta-constitutional. The actions of agents especially at the operational level related to processing and utilizing physical materials can thus be observed more closely. The theoretical framework developed in this study needs to look at the TOD concept comprehensively and for that, 4 (four) main aspects are placed in TOD development, namely regulatory aspects, planning and design aspects, institutional aspects, and funding and financing aspects into both arenas. Observations on each of the four aspects of TOD development using a theoretical framework based on the structuration theory and the AIAD analysis framework can explore and reveal howix formal and informal approaches occur and how informality works in relation to the consensus process undertaken. The findings of this study are that: (i) the key stakeholders in the development of TOD in the case study are the central government, local governments, transit agencies, and developers. In this case the TOD development has not involved the local community, residents or TOD users in decision making; (ii) There are gaps and a number of regulatory conflicts and the transportation and spatial planning regulations are not yet integrated, which encourage informality; (iii) There are indications of the realization of the TOD area through the MRT Jakarta case which combines formal and informal approaches, with other cases of TOD development through a single formal and informal approach that have not met the principles of TOD planning and design and tend to shift to Transit-Adjacent Development (TAD); (iv) There is coordination between transit agencies and developers at the operational level, but the coordination function at the collective choice agency level is still vacant; (v) The emergence of an alternative financing agreement in the Land Value Capture (LVC) scheme informally between transit agencies and developers, although public funding and financing is still limited to providing a transit system and there is no formal LVC mechanism for the TOD area; (vi) The informal approach that occurs is generally driven by control over land resources and interests for property project development by the developer. Meanwhile, the formal arena has not provided sufficient resources for TOD development; and (vii) in the four cases studied, generally the informal approach carried out by agents in developing the TOD area has not led to the success consensus of fulfilling the features of the TOD public facilities, except in the case of MRT Jakarta which obtained the assignment and authority of the transit agency as the TOD Area Operator. The MRT case shows the consensus in fulfillment of public facility features that meet the principles of the TOD concept, in contrast to the cases of LRT and Commuter Trains. Based on the above findings, this study reveals that at the operational level the informal approach is more effective in reaching an agreement between transit agencies and private actors, especially developers, rather than a formal approach which makes it difficult to reach an agreement. This is due to the inadequacy of the formal rules at the collective choice level that are needed to regulate agent actions at the operational level. Consensus achieved through informal approaches or approaches taken outside the applicable rules, works at the operational level, that is, the level of action that leads directly to the physical manifestation of material or use of resources. The result of the consensus is the TOD area master plan which indicates the potential fulfillment of the 5D principle of a TOD area (density, design, destination access, distance to transit, diversity). On the other hand, the provision of TOD rules at the collective choice level is still difficult because of the weak coordination and synchronization of regulations between government sectors as well as time-consuming regulatory procedures, especially regarding the integration of spatial planning rules and transportation rules needed for TOD development.x The conclusion of this study is that informality through consensus planning working at the operational level can drive the successful development of TOD. The potential planning product to drive TOD development is generated through the coordinating role of transit agencies. In the informal arena the role of transit agencies is very important and enlarged because of the role of the government being taken over by transit agencies, especially in bringing together public and private interests with regard to planning and financing that can approach the fulfillment of the ideal principles of the TOD area. Consensus products informally produced by transit agencies can become proposals for and accelerate decisions on changes to land and building use regulations, especially for governments who are at the level of collective choice. However, the success of fulfilling the TOD principle in the long term will still depend on the formal arena at the level of collective choice that reconciles the interests of operational agents with government parties representing the public interest. This is necessary in order to change the rules to regulate further operational actions to reduce the risk of development that is detrimental to the public. Policy intervention by the government is still necessary for the long-term goal of the realization of the TOD values. Theoretically, the results of this study will complement the theory of consensus planning which has not yet thoroughly discussed how informality works and the position of informal arenas in influencing the consensus planning. The novelty that results from the case of developing TOD against consensus theory is the separation between the informal arena at the operational level and the formal arena. This distinguishes the view from Woltjer's previous theory which suggested that formal and informal actors be identified and merged into one arena of reaching agreement. Practically the results of this research will be useful for multi-stakeholders involved in the development of TOD to be able to understand problems and to improve related policies or regulations. This study provides a number of practical recommendations, namely for the government to improve the regulation and arrangement of TOD institutions to create TOD areas that can effectively achieve positive values from the TOD concept by utilizing the proposed planning products generated from the informal arena. On the other hand, an informal approach at the operational level through granting authority to transit agencies as TOD Area Operators who have an interest in the realization of the ideal TOD area can be a reference for further TOD institutional development.