How do the various actors view and interact in the (CB)DRM spaces to realize their interests?
3.2 How do the various actors view and interact in the (CB)DRM spaces to realize their interests?
A number of actors are involved in promoting, implementing and expanding DRM in Indonesia. These actors include national and local governments, civil society organizations, private sectors and media. As a mandate of National Law on Disaster Management (24/2007), Indonesia encourages the active involvement of all actors in DRR to achieve sustainable resilience. This section focuses on how these actors interact and relate to one another in practice.
Interaction among government agencies The national agency and local agencies for disaster management, namely BNPB and BPBD, are supposed to take on roles as coordinating agencies in disaster management between line depart- ments. However, interaction between line ministries and administrative levels is at times confusing. Mandates, DRM policies, coordination and budget lines are being laid down in regulations and written on paper according to the DM law. In practice however, after the decentralization conflicts arose about which department or programme should provide budget for the range of DRM activities planned and requested from the village level. Currently it is the Depart ment of Public Works which coordinates spatial planning and budgets. Some say this coordination role should go back to Bappenas again which is in the position to mediate between departments and settle disputes.
directly to village level. Only funds for ER can be directly transferred not for disaster preparedness or mitigation measures. Most difficult is to obtain funds for infrastructural works for DRR, while it is easy to get funds approved for training.
The provincial BPBD in East Java views the ‘desa tangguh’ program as an opportunity to bring the diff erent line ministries together by combining and coordinating the various ‘desa tangguh’ programs in one locality. This is expected to make the program more effective and efficient. This will not be easy, but as a start the provincial BPBD could bring the line departments together that have
a role and res ponsibility during emergency response. The BPBD now has a central coordinating role, but SOPs among these agencies differ: e.g. in the SOP for flood response by the military and policy, alert level #1 is the highest danger level, while BPBD use alert level #3 as the highest level. Such a diff erence hampers coordination and that is why a new shared SOP has to be drafted. A new SOP is assumed to facilitate the drafting of a provincial policy for contingency planning since this also re- quires the involve ment of all stakeholders. The head of the BPBD expects that this process could be
a pathway for better interaction and cooperation among line ministries for the purpose of coordina- ting ‘desa tangguh’ support and other DRR measures. It may contribute to BPBDs becoming more legiti mate actors with authority. The provincial BPBD in East Java acknowledges the importance of Climate Change Adaptation, but it is unclear which line department should take a lead in this: is it BPBD, BMKG, Ministry of Environment, Ministry of Agriculture, or agencies dealing with water manage ment?
The district BPBD of Padang Pariaman realizes that it should coordinate DRM efforts and support DRR mainstreaming in line departments. However, BPBD admitted that this role is still limited. E.g. the con tribution of Public Works to build tsunami evacuation routes is still limited. Whereas the Bupati (Head of District) already requested line departments to mainstream DRM, it is still difficult in prac tice. Line departments assume that any activity related to DRM is the responsibility of the BPBD. BPBD realizes the importance to take a multi-hazard perspective although current focus is on tsunami and earthquake preparedness. Currently, the coordination with NGOs is still poor. While
a DRM Forum exists, some NGOs tend to work on their own and therefore partnerships remain a challenge.
The BPBD of Kota Padang realizes that community resilience is still a long way in Padang. Staff refer- red to the earthquake on 11 April 2012 when people paniced and did not follow guidelines agreed in the previous simulation and training. BPBD believes that the role of NGOs is crucial in reaching and educating communities. However, they see that the partnership of NGO tends to focus on the provin- cial level while city-level partnerships are limited.
The Provincial BPBD in West Sumatra believes that its role is to strengthen the district and municipality BPBDs in West Sumatra. Coordination with other line provincial institutions in West Sumatra, such as public works, education exist but is still limited. While it admit that West Sumatra is at risk to multi-hazards, most of programmes that BPBD implement focus on tsunami and earthquake preparedness. With the help of BNPB they have had 10 early warning systems installed along the coast of West Sumatra. They also support the BNPB programme of Desa Tangguh in Agam District.
Regarding the 5 roles the government could play in DRM (see page 7) we observed that it (1) provides relief goods and services, and is developing its legitimacy as (2) coordinator of multi- stakeholders activities. The other roles (3) as promoters of collective action and private sector activity; (4) regulators of private sector activity, and (5) as risk avoiders meaning refraining from actions that generate risks, are not visible. Most BPBDs admit the challenge to get the commitment of other line agencies to support DRM and response programmes. During coordination consultations, line agencies agree to provide assistance but the implementation is still weak.
Interaction between government agencies, NGOs and private sectors BNBP and districts BPBD are in favor of linking/contracting NGOs to implement the ‘desa tangguh’ programme because NGOs have more capacity to do this task. The BPBDs we visited thank their existence largely to NGO involvement and the support of CBO-networks.
BNPB is trying to approach private sectors to support its ‘Desa Tangguh’ programme with the corporate social responsibility programme (CSR) that is common in some private companies. Until now, the concept is not very clear how to implement this but BNPB suggests that with the data from mapping of ‘Desa Tangguh’ they are able to direct any assistance to achieve positive impact of the Desa Tangguh programme. Some BPBDs however, have second thoughts about linking with private sector (banks, companies) because their CSR funds just aim to secure their own investments. The private sector, however, comprises large multinational companies as well as local entrepreneurs or farmers who are considered community members rather than representatives of the private sector like e.g. local cooperatives that are part of people’s livelihoods or in a negative sense, small-scale miners and contractors whose activities degrade the environment.
The provincial BPBD in East Java carefully facilitated the formation of a provincial DRM Platform – with some distance. Its members are carefully invited and should have a neutral outlook towards local politicians. The CSO-DRM platform consists of 2 universities, PMI, Jangkar Kelud, NU, Jawa Pos, one more private sector and BPBD. NU and universities take the lead in drafting district regulations on DM and ‘desa tangguh’ while the NGOs and CSOs push and lobby to get these approved through legislative bodies like district parlia ments. Instead of getting DM legislation through the executive
body 12 , opting for the legislative bodies saves time and resources. This could be a model to draft and pass district legislation on DM elsewhere. These regulations are required to enable BPBD to draft a mid-term development plan that considers DRM, which will also ease negotiations with line departments. The BPBD further welcomes such a Forum to share workloads, and to access pool of trainers/facilitators for capacity building.
Provincial BPBD in West Sumatra attempts to involve the private sector in DRM like Padang Cement Factory and Djarum Cigarette Company but involvement is still limited during ER. The provincial BPBD acknowledges the contribution of NGOs in building community resilience in the province. The BPBD prefers to work with INGOs and donors since both provide financial support, programmes and man power. Tosupport partnerships with NGOs it offers to host the secretariat for NGOs in its office. However, BPBD is not clear in directing NGOs to achieve DRR goals in West Sumatra.
BPBD in Sikka and Ende – being relatively new agencies – expressed that they currently rely on what NGOs have carried out in the communities. Therefore, their strategies are to continue previous programmes of NGOs. In this light, they focus on the emergency and preparedness process by strengthening community preparedness teams (Tim Siaga Bencana Desa / Kelurahan) and provide certificates to the volunteers of the preparedness teams. Tim Siaga Bencana in fact has been a district program by Bupati of Ende which was endorsed by a district law. However, the support, facilitation and training of DPTs still rely on previous experiences with NGOs. BPBDs have very limited budget for DRR, which limits the strengthening community preparedness programme.
NGOs view local people in different ways: from uneducated, unprepared and unaware citizens towards active creative actors. The way NGOs view local communities have consequences for the intervention strategies and goals they formulate. These vary from education, awareness raising and
12 The legal office drafts a new DM regulation which requires consensus among the different line ministries after it 12 The legal office drafts a new DM regulation which requires consensus among the different line ministries after it
At the local level, we observed linkages between different villages through CBOs as a way to replicate short term preparedness, to exchange experiences, to coordinate with government and for lobby and advocacy purposes. Linkage building was done through NGO facilitation or through CBO leaders. Capacity of these networks is limited to disaster preparedness awareness raising and formation of CBO networks. Long-term and more complex structural DRR initiatives are not yet taken up in an organized manner. Only the Partners for Resilience programme offer a broader and more holistic approach to CBDRM that include creation of enabling factors and conditions that support resilience. For example, in Ende District, the communities received assistance on installing biogas systems from pig husbandaries which are important to tackle environmental problems, reduce community costs for fuel replacing firewood as an energy source for cooking. Biogas installation further has a positive effect on people’s health since pig faeces is now stored in containers. The use of biogas may potentially reduce the use of firewood which may have a positive effect on the environment and reduces the risk of flashfloods and landslides.
In NTT cooperation between NGOs with a different mandate aims to combine expertise in addressing risks problems (PfR). Sharing among NGOs and understanding that they are working together to achieve community resilience are encouraging them. Since the PfR just started their integrated approach we couldn’t observe and assess yet the added value of such approach. We appreciate – and also the communities – the integration of a livelihoods-lens into DRM beyond disaster preparedness.
Media organizations can have the role to pass on warning and educate the people on disasters using print, radio, television and internet. Media reports about disaster events which may influence and move people into action. JawaPos publishes warnings from BMKG even before the government declares the state of emergency. JawaPos is willing to partner with BNBP to increase awareness among the public as long it is news, sexy and useful for the audience. Better is to link with local media which are more open to publish on local disaster events (small scale disaster). FIRD collaborates with Kupang Pos, a local media, to distribute the information of CBDRM activities.
Private sector generates its own resources to spend on DRM as part of their Corporate Social Responsibility. YIC for instance – established by JawaPos - ventured into education and networking activities using their capacity of disseminating their publications. It also receives funds from Pertamina.’ Edusaster’ is an activity it runs during emergency time. They send disaster related publications to evacuation centers and work through teachers association and universities. They also collect relief goods through the media which it ships to the affected areas. Mercy Corps has an idea of Public Private Partnership in Disaster Management which encourage the use of CSR funds in DRR. Subsequently, a private sector forum in West Sumatra was established in 2007 with Padang Cement Company. However, it was noted that the involvement of private sector was still limited and was focused on an establishment of task force for ER. It is important to note that the private sector can be subject of CBO/NGO advocacy and mobilization because of the business’ nature of operations that generate adverse consequences and produces disaster vulnerability particularly affecting the environment and labour malpractices. There is not yet a clear and agreed upon partnership between the government and the private sector in DRR efforts. It is an area for further exploration.
Mercy Corps works with local partners, some of these include Kogami and Jemari Sakato (established local NGOs in West Sumatra). Kogami is a local NGO formed soon after the tsunami in Aceh by a group of volunteers who joined a survey on tsunami impact. Kogami focuses on tsunami preparedness. To strengthen their partnerships, in early years, Kogami conducted workshops with Moslim Preachers so that they could share DRR in their preaching in West Sumatra. However, it did not work as expected since the preaching related the occurrence of disasters to a sin to God which did not motivate communities to care for preparedness. Kogami collaborated with Radio Antar Penduduk Indonesia (RAPI) / (Indonesian Inter-Citizenry Radio). Kogami facilited the establishment of Jaringan Jurnalis Siaga Bencana (Journalism Network on Disaster Preparedness). Through the Journalist Network, Kogami gets some column in local newspapers to disseminate DRR news. Using the network, Kogami also can access local television to conduct talk show on disaster preparedness.
Vulnerable groups are not explicitly involved in the programmes only in terms of categories. They are assumed to benefit from programmes and activities but not recognized as marginalized and social excluded (see conclusions 2.1). HCVAs are conducted but actually not used to differentiate in strategies for different community groups. Livelihood strategies to strengthen coping and adaptation strategies are also absent in all programs. Involvement of the marginalized groups tends to be various, some can be active and some are still less. There have been dominant roles of some elites groups and/or some members of the community which have been the focal points in other development activities.
Conclusions
1. Interaction among actors occur in various ways. Government at all levels realize that external sources, donors, NGOs, private sectors and media are important to enhance the DRM program and to increase community resilience. In advancing CBDRM, BNPB tries to approach this by putting necessary information clear for everyone before they take action where to support the ‘desa tangguh program’. At the local level, the limited resources of BPBD suggests that they are open for any assistance provided by NGO, private sectors and media.
2. Communication between government from national level (BNPB) to provincial level BPBD and district level BPBD is quite good. However, the decentralization law does not allow BNPB to directly assist or allocate resourcesto district level BPBDs. This becomes a problem since many district BPBDs are new agencies with very limited DRM resources. BNPB can provide direct assistance during emergency situations, while in normal circumstances it can only provide assistance to provincial BPBDs. Therefore DRM programs, including ‘desa tangguh’ have to
be channeled through provincial BPBD, which causes mis-coordination and delay in terms of implementation.
3. Partnerships among NGOs are crucial in widening the networks in terms of expertise and
coverage, but they can play more advanced role by being a critical policy monitor to advance the interests of vulnerable and marginalized groups. This is in line with the spirit of how Kappala and FIRD relate with communities: they view local people not as beneficiaries but as capable active survivors. Their CBDRM interventions aim to enhance community capacity and awareness on how to take initiative to deal with their DRM related problems
4. A community network, such as Jangkar Kelud, has a potential to access material, social and political resources through such network by utilizing the exposure in media, through contacts with NGOs and faith-based organizations and with BPBDs as an entry-point to other government departments.
5. Faith-based organizations are important nodes and have important networks since they are embedded in communities since a long time. They are trusted by villagers and the communities are familar with their approaches and programmes. Nevertheless, there is limitation that some marginalized people may not be reached well.
6. The role of the media is under-used by CSOs and NGOs as an instrument to advance community’ DRM agendas and for playing the role as critical policy monitor.
7. We encourage to further research the role of private sector in DRM considering the multi- faceted appearance of the private sector and its potential roles in the different phases of DRM. It is important to look whether shared interests exist to foster resilience for local communities and to consider the interests of the private sector, instead of assuming that only conflicting interests exist.