Communication to Find Water Intake Location within Public Private Partnership between Tangerang Government Authority and PT Aetra Air Tangerang

Authors

  • Binsar Naipospos School of Architecture, Planning, and Policy Development, Institut Teknologi Bandung
  • Aulia Paramita School of Architecture, Planning, and Policy Development, Institut Teknologi Bandung

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5614/jpwk.2019.30.2.5

Keywords:

PPP, communicative planning, clean water infastructure.

Abstract

This article aimed to explore an effective communicative planning approach in infrastructure development using the PPP scheme, incorporating the complementary concepts of communicative planning and critical pragmatism. From 2005 to 2007, an epidemic disease severely threatened the District of Tangerang, which was found to be caused by poor water quality and improper clean water management. The limited local government budget and capability was a double issue that encouraged the participation of the private sector in building a drinking water infrastructure by using a public private partnership (PPP) scheme. One of the scopes of the project was finding the best tapping intake location for the Drinking Water Supply System (SPAM "? Sistem Penyediaan Air Minum). Rather than being simply an infrastructure project, PPP is a complex field of power relations among actors and groups, since it is implemented across institutions and jurisdictions. It took three years of intensive communication between governments, private parties, and lawmakers from the district, the provincial, and the national level. Both primary and secondary data were analyzed with a qualitative approach to gain a deeper understanding of the case study. The result showed that to make the PPP scheme successful, the planners involved in the PPP team dealt with power imbalances by creating networks with the other actors and making them engaged in bargaining processes to reach the desired agreements.

Abstrak. Artikel ini bertujuan untuk mengeksplorasi pendekatan perencanaan komunikatif yang efektif dalam pengembangan infrastruktur dengan menggunakan skema Kerjasama Pemerintah Badan Usaha (KPBU) melalui penelitian perencanaan komunikasi praktis di Indonesia. Dari tahun 2005 hingga 2007 suatu penyakit epidemik diare menyerang parah Kabupaten Tangerang yang disebabkan oleh buruknya kualitas air dan pengelolaan air bersih yang tidak tepat. Terbatasnya anggaran pemerintah daerah dan ketidak-mampuan anggaran adalah dua masalah besar yang mendorong perlunya partisipasi sektor swasta untuk membangun infrastruktur air bersih melalui skema KPBU. Salah satu masalah pelik yang menjadi fokus ruang lingkup penelitian ini adalah bagaimana menentukan lokasi pengambilan sadapan air untuk Sistem Penyediaan Air Minum (SPAM). Menentukan lokasi tempat penyadapan air dalam proyek KPBU adalah suatu hal yang rumit karena berhubungan dengan kekuasaan antar berbagai aktor dan kelompok. Diperlukan sekitar tiga tahun untuk berkomunikasi secara intensif antara pemerintah, swasta, legislatif baik di tingkat kabupaten, provinsi, dan pusat. Data primer dan sekunder telah dianalisis dengan metoda pendekatan kualitatif untuk menelusuri dan memberikan pemahaman yang lebih mendalam untuk kasus studi. Hasilnya menunjukkan bahwa untuk menyukseskan kesepakatan dimana tempat lokasi penyadapan air disepakati dalam skema KPBU, para perencana yang ada dalam tim KPBU harus mengatasi adanya ketidakseimbangan kekuatan dan kekuasaan antar berbagai aktor. Semua aktor harus berkomunikasi dengan saling bertukar-menukar ide, data dan informasi agar kesepakatan dapat tercapai sesuai keinginan.

Kata kunci. PPP, perencanaan komunikatif, infrastruktur air bersih.

Author Biography

Binsar Naipospos, School of Architecture, Planning, and Policy Development, Institut Teknologi Bandung

PWK ITB

References

Albrechts, L. (2003) Reconstructing Decision-Making: Planning versus Politics'. Journal of Planning Theory 2(3), 249-268.

Batley, R. (1996) Public Private Partnership and Performance in Service Provision. Journal of Urban Studies 33(4-5), 723-751.

Bond, S. (2011) Negotiating a Democratic Ethos: Moving Beyond the Agonistic-Communicative Divide. Journal of Planning Theory 10(2), 161-186.

Booher, D. and J. Innes (2002) Network Power in Collaborative Planning'. Journal of Planning Education and Research 21, 221-236.

Brand, R. and F. Gaffikin (2007) Collaborative Planning in an Uncollaborative World'. Journal of Planning Theory 6, 282-313.

Castells, M. (2009) Communication Power. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc.

Cheng, Y. (2013) Collaborative Planning in the Network: Consensus Seeking in Urban Planning Issues on the Internet the Case of China. Journal of Planning Theory 12, 351.

Cowan, G. and A. Arsenault (2008) Moving from Monologue to Dialogue to Collaboration: the Three Layers of Public Diplomacy. ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science Vol. 616.

Creswell, J.W. (2009) Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. Sage Pub. Thousand Oaks: CA.

Fisher, R. and W.L. Ury (1981) Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement without Giving in. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Flynn, J. (2004) Communicative Power in Habermas's Theory of Democracy. EJPT 2004 3, 433-454.

Forester, J. (1982) Planning in the Face of Power. Journal of the American Planning Association 48(1), 67-80.

Forester, J. (2009) Dealing with Differences: Dramas of Mediating Public Disputes. Oxford University Press.

Habermas, J. (1984) The Theory of Communicative Action: Vol. 1: Reason and the Rationalization of Society, trans. T. McCarthy. Boston: Beacon. (Original Work Published 1981).

Harper, T., A. Yeh, and H. Costa (2008) Dialogues in Urban & Regional Planning 3' Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. New York & London.

Healey, P. (1992) Planning Through Debate: The Communicative Turn in Planning Theory. The Town Planning Review 63(2), 143-162.

Healey, P. (2003) Collaborative Planning in Perspective. Journal of Planning Theory 2, 101- 123.

Hillier, J. (2003) Agonizing Over Consensus: Why Habermasian Ideals Cannot be "Real'. Journal of Planning Theory 2(1), 37-59.

Hoch, C.J. (2007) Pragmatic Communicative Action Theory. Journal of Planning Education and Research 26, 272-283.

Innes, J.E. and D.E. Booher (2010) Planning with Complexity: An Introduction to Collaborative Rationality for Public Policy. New York: Routledge.

Innes, J.E. and D.E. Booher (1999) Consensus Building as Role Playing and Bricolage: Toward a Theory of Collaborative Planning. Journal of the American Planning Association 65(1), 9-26.

Innes, J.E. and D.E. Booher (2004) Reframing Public Participation: Strategies for the 21st Century. Planning Theory and Practice 5(4), 419-436.

Innes, J. and D.E. Booher (2010) Planning with Complexity: An Introduction to Collaborative Rationality for Public Policy. Routledge: London and New York.

Innes, J.E. and D.E. Booher (2000) Network Power in Collaborative Planning. University of California: Berkeley, IURD.

Innes, J.E. (Univ. of California) (2004) Consensus Building: Clarifications for the Critics. Planning Theory 3(1), 5-20.

Machler and Milz (2015) The Evolution Of Communicative Planning Theory. AESOP Young Academics Booklet Series B.

Margerum, R.D. (2002) Collaborative Planning: Building Consensus and Building a Distinct Model for Practice. Journal of Planning Education Research 21, 237-253.

Mazza, L. (2006) Giving Pause. Journal of Planning Theory 5, 109.

Miraftab, F. (2004) Public-Private Partnerships: the Trojan Horse of Neoliberal Development ?. Journal of Planning Education and Research 24, 89-101.

Mohit, M.A. and R. Harun (2007) Developing A Communicative Planning Approach to Resolve Land Use Conflicts in Jelutong Area Of Georgetown, Penang, Malaysia. Journal of the Malaysian Institute of Planners V, 95-112.

Moulaert, F. and K. Cabaret (2006) Planning, Networks and Power Relations: is Democratic Planning Under Capitalism Possible ? Journal of Planning Theory 5, 51.

Naipospos, B. (2014) Adaptive Negotiation Pattern within Public Private Partnership (Case Study: Clean Water Infrastructure in Tangerang). Dissertation, ITB, Bandung

Naipospos, B., B. Kombaitan, I. Syabri, and Pradono (2011) Collaborative Negotiation during PPP Project for Clean Water in Indonesia. Journal of Science and Technology 1, 3.

Naipospos, B., B. Kombaitan, I. Syabri, and Pradono (2012) Interaction Among Actors During Negotiation in PPP Project for Clean Water in Tangerang. International Seminar, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

Naipospos, B., B. Kombaitan, I. Syabri, and Pradono (2012) Negotiation in PPP Project for Clean Water in Indonesia. International Simposium of Building Human Settlement, Bandar Sri Begawan, Brunei Darussalam.

Neuman, M., and S. Smith (2010) City Planning and Infrastructure: Once and Future Partners. Journal of Planning History 9, 21.

Neville, K.J. (2011) Adversaries versus Partners: Urban Water Supply in the Philippines. Journal of Pacific Affairs 84, 2.

Olsson, A.R. (2009) Relational Rewards and Communicative Planning: Understanding Actor Motivation. Planning Theory 8(3), 263-281. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095209104826

Olsson, A.R. (2009) Relational Reward and Communicative Planning: Understanding Actor Motivation. Journal of Planning Theory 8(3), 263-281.

Pammer, W.J. and K. Jerri (2003) Handbook of Conflict Management. Marcel Dekker Inc: Madison Avenue, New York.

Pemerintah Republik Indonesia. Peraturan Presiden Republik Indonesia nomor 38 Tahun 2015 tentang Kerjasama Pemerintah dengan Badan Usaha dalam Penyediaan Infrastruktur (2015).

Portugali, J. and N. Alfasi (2008) An Approach to Planning Discourse Analysis. Journal of Urban Studies 45(2), 251-272.

Purcell, M. (2009) Resisting Neo-liberalization: Communicative Planning or Counter-Hegemony Movement?. Journal of Planning Theory 8(2), 140-165.

Rabinowitz, K. (2006) Adaptation Index' Professional Development Group. PDG Limited Publishing: New York.

Rydin, Y. (2012) Book Review: Planning with Complexity: an Introduction to Collaborative Rationality for Public Policy. Journal of Planning Education and Research 32, 369.

Sager, T. (2006) The Logic of Critical Communicative Planning: Transaction Cost Alteration. Planning Theory 5(3), 223-254. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095206068629

Sager, T. (2006) The Logic of Critical Communicative Planning: Transaction Cost Alteration. Journal of Planning Theory 5(3), 223-254.

Shmueli, D.F., K. Sandra, and O. Connie (2008) Mining Negotiation Theory for Planning Insights. Journal of Planning Education & Research 27, 359-364.

Silva, E.R. (2011) Deliberative Improvisation: Planning Highway Franchises in Santiago, Chile. Journal of Planning Theory 10, 35.

Susskind, L., and C. Ozawa (1984) Mediated Negotiation in the Public Sector : The Planner as Mediator. Journal of Planning Education and Research 4, 5.

Throgmorton, J.A. (2003) Book Review of Lawrence Susskind: the Consensus Building Handbook: a Comprehensive Guide to Reaching Agreement. Journal of Planning Theory 2: 61-69.

Throgmorton, J.A. (2003) Planning as Persuasive Storytelling in a Global-scale Web of Relationships. Journal of Planning Theory 2(2), 125-151.

Vento, A.T. (2016) Mega-project Meltdown: Post-politics, Neoliberal Urban Regeneration and Valencia's Fiscal Crisis. Urban Studies, 1-17.

Watson, V. (2006) Deep Difference: Diversity, Planning & Ethics. Journal of Planning Theory 5, 31-52.

Yiftachel, O. (1999) Planning Theory at a Crossroad: The Third Oxford Conference. Journal of Planning Education and Research 18(3), 267-269.

Downloads

Published

2019-08-21

Issue

Section

Research Articles