Underneath the Flyover: An examination of infrastructure and marginalization in Bandung, Indonesia

Zannah Matson International Course Module - Indonesia

2

Underneath the Fly-Over: An examination of infrastructure and marginalization in Bandung, Indonesia

Indonesiaʼs era of decentralization came as a response to the centralized rule in the

Suharto era and, more directly, as a result of strong structural adjustment programs

implemented after the Asian Economic crisis that hit the country in 1997 and 1998.

Requiring devolution of power to municipal governments for the provision of services and

the responsibilities of economic development, this legislation has fundamentally altered the

role of cities within Indonesian governance. This paper will examine the discourse of

decentralization, and the tension of its interpretation at the municipal and sub-municipal

level. As local governments strengthen and position themselves for regional competition,

their mandates increasingly encroach into informal settlements and threaten the existence

of the most marginalized urban populations. To illustrate the tangible repercussions of these

planning initiatives, this paper will further focus its attention on the construction and

consequences of the Pasupati Fly-Over in Bandung.

Decentralization is currently on the lips of nearly everyone involved in urban planning

and development in Indonesia. It marks a new era for this fledgling democracy, which was

formerly characterized by strong central government, but it has now turned a new page,

seeking to strengthen regional powers. Two seminal pieces of national legislation were

passed in 1999 that have initiated this devolution of power – Law No. 22/1999 on Regional

Government and Law No.25/1999 on Fiscal Balance between Central Government and

Regions (Alm and Bahl 1999, 1). The former has been the most instrumental in changes in

municipal governance; it stipulates the devolution of many agencies and services previously

provided by the state to become the responsibility of the municipality. The latter piece of

legislation has impressed on municipalities the need to become more fiscally independent

3

with heightened responsibilities for natural resource management (Resosudarmo 2004,

111). The strengthened authority afforded by these changes has altered the relationship of

local governments within their context vis-à-vis both internal and external pressures.

Under Suharto, market forces ruled supreme in the allocation of land uses; those

who had the money to develop were afforded the freedom to do so anywhere. In this

environment, zoning regulations were of little importance in determining the growth agenda

for municipal areas and the capacity for ambitious planning was limited (Zulkaidi April 26th,

2010, lecture). Although decentralization legislation appears to remedy this problem by

providing increased autonomy at the municipal level, its results have been far from liberating

for marginalized groups within each city. The dramatic changes disguise the continued

dominance of market forces for the allocation of land uses, which have merely been

transferred to an alternate dimension of governance. Decentralization has altered the

landscape of competition from that of enterprise within each city to regional contestations

for investment and development. Cities have begun to position themselves externally,

seeking interest and investment for the creation of strong individual economies. As such,

the Indonesian trend of decentralization marks only a shift in the scale of competition, from

the sub-municipal to that between regions, thus limiting fundamental changes to the land-

use model.

The Pusapati Fly-Over, a large-scale infrastructure project in Bandung, represents

an attempt by the city to become more regionally competitive. Despite a relatively recent

completion, the Pusapatiʼs striking outline has become a symbol of the city and its

provisions for growth. Opened in 2005, this cable-stayed construction stretches across the

Tamansari Valley to ease automobile transportation within the city and provide increased

4

access to its business and commercial districts. Effectively it comprises a vital link between

the East and West transportation networks for the ease of high-speed automobile mobility

for both passengers and freight (Yasin 2006, 121). The motivation for its creation was to

alleviate the traffic congestion that plagues Bandung, while facilitating efficient

transportation across the city, formerly difficult in the North-South oriented city. The fly-over

had been officially incorporated into the Bandung Masterplan of 1971, but it was not until

1996 that it was officially proposed and brought closer to a stage of implementation (Yasin

2006, 120). As was characteristic of this time in Indonesia, the project was met with a

tumultuous response, a debate that provides tangible insight into the Indonesian planning

process.

While today the fly-over and its functions have taken on the speed and efficiency

characteristic of transportation arteries, the people and activities underneath portray an

alternative narrative. The ascent of this construction to visual and symbolic prominence

within Bandung obscures the

contested history of its construction

and fails to recognize the

displacement caused by its

foundation. The implementation of

plans for the fly-over was delayed

for many years because of protests

from the communities threatened

by its presence in the Temansari

Valley. These neighborhoods had sprung up in the same manner as many kampungs,

Looking out from underneath the fly-over at the neighboring communities that fill the Tamansari Valley

5

settling into the undeveloped space of the valley informally and becoming increasingly

reified as residences and communities (Yasin 2006, 121). What ensued was a debate

between the desires of the effected communities and the strengthening vision of the city for

increased transportation infrastructure believed to strengthen the local economy and attract

investment. As the trend towards decentralization increased, the heightened authority of the

municipality afforded it the planning capacity to implement this large-scale project for the

development of its economic infrastructure.

Often, increased planning autonomy can allow cities to engage in sovereign planning

initiative that consider local contexts and realities (Resosudarmo 2004, 111). The case of

the Pusapati Fly-Over provided me with a contrary example to this argumentation, as

Bandungʼs economic and

governance responsibilities

have caused it to focus on

attracting external investment

by increasing automobile

transport, at the cost of

marginalizing its informal

settlements. While I was

conducting research in the

Spring of 2010, Pa Dedi, the

Rukun Warga (RW) for the one of the most effected communities, could still be found under

the Pusapati, selling drinks and snacks as an informal vendor. He has been selling in

approximately the same location for twenty years and is one of the few left vending in this

Myself and Pa Dedi at his vending spot underneath the Pusapati. Behind is an example of the artwork that adorns the supports.

6

radically changed environment. Where there were houses and winding footpaths

characteristic of kampungs only ten years before, now there is simply a floor of packed

earth and a few local students who come here on their lunch breaks. Dedi was one of the

lucky ones from his neighborhood as his current residence was just outside of the swath cut

by the fly-over, but his shop and market were obliterated by its construction. Other residents

were not as fortunate; as the government still legally owned the land, 300 households were

forced to relocate to the Cisarenten area, far from their original location (Yasin 2006, 121).

While the destructive impacts of this relocation were recognized after vehement protest, the

project continued with only marginal changes.

The construction of the Pusapati Fly-Over presents the complex relationship

between local governments, the citizens they represent, and the greater international

context in which they function. Although its creation uprooted many, increased autonomy

and changes to Indonesian governance have also allowed for experimentation with models

of participatory governance in attempts to overcome the challenges of large-scale relocation

(Yasin 2006, 125). The methods have developed further through the work of MercyCorps

and the Jakarta toll road, which displaced many low-income communities. After the

construction of this West Java highway, designed to connect the commercial centres of

Bandung and Jakarta, displaced families began to resettle the space underneath the road,

violating Indonesian law. When these unsafe living conditions resulted in a fire that

damaged a sizable section of the road and closed it for repairs, authorities intervened to

remove the informal settlements. MercyCorps mediated the ensuing conflict by facilitating

community involvement in the design of the space, incorporating desires for accessible

green space and recreational facilities. This civil society intervention demonstrates potential

7

for alleviating the marginalization of residents through innovative planning initiatives,

although it has not been capable of reversing the overall trend of displacing the most

vulnerable echelons of society in favor of large-scale economic infrastructure.

The ongoing status changes and conflicting agendas

for the area beneath the fly-over, combined with the history of

its creation, has developed it is a contested space within the

city. Rumours abound that the city has zoned the space to

become a park, but neighboring residents worry that they will

not be welcome to participate in the space, and it will be

instead reserved to comprise part of the cityʼs goal of 30%

green space. Pa Dedi shared this worry, as he had just heard

he would no longer be able to sell underneath the bridge as of

the end of May, causing questions and worries for his future

and the future of those in his community. Although he

acknowledged he felt responsible for those in his community,

he was unable to organize them because thinking about the

struggle necessary gave him a headache. Perhaps the most

striking moment in this interview was Dedi confiding that his

biggest worry about the bridge was that it would come crashing down, indicating the

powerlessness of those affected by its construction. For those in the path of the fly-over, its

construction does not represent a step towards prosperity as it does for the aggregate city,

as it has instead compounded their marginalization.

Some of the artwork that can be found adorning the foundation of the fly over.

8

Local artists have helped to illustrate the tenuous existence of life in the shadow of

the Pusapati by adorning its mammoth concrete supports with depictions of idealized urban

environments and allusions to the conflict of its creation.

This artwork is a reminder of the human element of

otherwise faceless infrastructure projects and creates a

sense of place for those like Pa Dedi that rely on this

space for their livelihoods. The area has been further

occupied through community programming that seeks to

reclaim the space for the local residents instead of

allowing its appropriation as a part of the cityʼs targets for

ʻpristineʼ green space. Earth Day April 2010 saw a series

of performances and activities underneath the fly-over to demonstrate the capacity of

community programming to work towards environmental agendas instead of holding them

as mutually exclusive activities represented by fenced-off parks. Initiatives such as this

provide examples of the active citizen participation in the creation of place within the city.

This process contributes a less formalized layer to the interactions between citizens and the

urban space that is not represented though the organized participatory planning initiatives.

While the construction of the Pusapati fly-over provides evidence of the tension

between infrastructure developments and marginalized urban populations, it is further

representative of the impacts of decentralization on Indonesia. The struggle over space that

characterized the introduction of this structure into Bandungʼs cityscape is one that has

been heightened through pressure on municipalities to become competitive entities within

the national governance structure. Despite the shift in power and policy focus that has been

9

initiated by decentralization legislation, market forces as a mechanism of land zoning and

allocation remains dominant. To ensure the sustainability of current planning and growth

trajectories, it is imperative that municipal governments are cognizant of the impacts of

movement towards becoming autonomous entities and economic actors. Balancing both

external and internal urban demands has become increasingly crucial with heightened

independence, and it will continue to feature prominently as cities forge the infrastructure for

their own growth.

10

Works Cited

Alm, James and Roy Bahl. (1999). “Decentralization in Indonesia: Prospects and Problems.” United States Agency for International Development.

Yasmin, Prasetiyo Effendi. (2006). Making of Place Through Creative Participatory Planning: The case of Pasupati cable stayed fly over development in Bandung.” Arte-Polis: Creative Culture and the Making of Place. Resosudarmo, Ida Aju Pradnja. (2004). “Closer to people and trees: Will decentralization work for the people and the forests of Indonesia?” The European Journal of Development Research. 16: 1, 110 — 132.

Zulkaidi, Denny. (April 26th, 2010). “Urban Planning in Bandung: A Lecture.” Institut Teknologi Bandung.