Gotong Royong

Working Together
Transformative landscape based design with kampung

communities in West-Java, Indonesia

Thomas van den Berg and Hanshu Liu

Major Thesis Landscape Architecture

Wageningen, August 2014
Wageningen University and Research Centre
Master Landscape Architecture & Spatial Planning
[LAR-80436]
Colophon
© Wageningen University, 2014

Thomas van den Berg

Registration number: 880626-055-010
thomasdvandenberg@gmail.com

Hanshu Liu
Registration number: 880303-523-060
liu.hanshu@gmail.com

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 architecture

Phone: +31 317 484 056
Fax: +31 317 482 166
E-mail: office.lar@wur.nl
www.lar.wur.nl

Postal address
Postbus 47
6700 AA, Wageningen
The Netherlands

Visiting address
Gaia (building no. 101)
Droevendaalsesteeg 3
6708 BP, Wageningen
The 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.
Abstract
Increasing 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 - Bahasa
Meningkatkan 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.
Table of content

1 Fascination 1
1.1 Mega-urbanization of Asian cities 2
1.2 Introduction to Indonesia 2
1.3 History of Jakarta and urban development 2
1.4 Decentralization 3
1.5 Urbanization: Environmental problems 5
1.6 Findings 5

2 Theoretical framework 6
2.1 The field of landscape architecture 8
2.2 Need for participation 11
2.3 Visual methods as a tool 12
2.4 Findings 13

3 Problem framework 14
3.1 Connecting theories and forming the knowledge gap 16
3.2 Research significance and knowledge gap for collaboration partners 16
3.3 Problem statement 17
3.4 Main research question 17
3.5 Findings 17

4 Research design 18
4.1 Introduction 20
4.2 Philosophical assumptions 20
4.3 Theoretical lens 20
4.4 Transformative research design 21
4.5 Relation between research and design 22
4.6 Design as synthesis 22
4.7 Limitations 23
4.8 Participatory environmental planning: The Green Towns Project 23
4.9 Case selection and institutional embedding 23
4.10 Role of researchers and participants 23
4.11 Data collection process 30
4.12 Findings 31

5 Landscape analysis 32
5.1 Jakarta Metropolitan Area 34
5.2 Puncak scale 36
5.3 Kampung scale 46
5.4 Findings 66

6 Participatory environmental planning 68

6.1 Introduction 70
6.2 Other workshops 70
6.3 Facilitators training 73
6.4 Adaptations 74
6.5 PEP Workshop-day1 78
6.6 PEP Workshop-day2 84
6.7 PEP Workshop-day3 90
6.8 Photoshop workshop 98
6.9 Timeline workshop 102
6.10 Other activities 106
6.11 Findings 107
7 Translation 109

8 Design 113
8.1 Design process 114
8.2 Research for design outcomes 114
8.3 Design principles 115
8.4 Design strategy 132
8.5 Detail designs 134
8.6 Design implementation in time frame 147
8.7 Conclusin 147

9 Conclusion&discussion 152
9.1 Conclusion 154
9.2 Discussion 160

References 164

List of figures 168

Digital appendix 171

1. Fascination
 Gotong Royong - Working together
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).
2
Chapter 1: Fascination
1.2 Introduction to Indonesia
Indonesia 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-
Figure 1.1 Jakarta Metropolitan Area urbanization from year 1983 to
2005
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
 Gotong Royong - Working together
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
Figure 1.2 Flooding of Jakarta’s canals and river system
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
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
3
 Gotong Royong - Working together
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-
Table 1.1 Land-use conversion in the area of Bogor-Puncak-Cianjur(Bopunjur) and Bandung Metrolitan Area (BMA), 1994-2001 (in ha).
4
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
 Gotong Royong - Working together
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 Findings
It 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.
5
2. Theoretical
framework
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 2: Theoretical framework

2. Theoretical framework
2.1 The field of landscape architecture

2.1.1 Definition of landscape architecture 2.1.2 Landscape-based design approach

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).
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-

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- Figure 2.1 Kerkstra and Vrijlandt’s triplex model (1988)
low.
8
 Gotong Royong - Working together
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 Environment Economic
Cultural
Biotic Political
Figure 2.2 Based on Kleefmann’s sociophysical-organisation model
(1992)
Chapter 2: Theoretical framework
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.
9
 Gotong Royong - Working together
Figure 2.3 Based on Duchhart’s integrated model (2007)
2.1.4 Landscape architecture in developing
countries
Indonesia 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-
10
Chapter 2: Theoretical framework
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 Indonesia
It 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
 Gotong Royong - Working together
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 Appraisal
Reason 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
Chapter 2: Theoretical framework
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
11
 Gotong Royong - Working together
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 approach
We 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
12
Chapter 2: Theoretical framework
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
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 2: Theoretical framework

and can help to improve awareness of local issues The theories discussed in this chapter aim to explain
among the participants (Petheram, Stacey, Campbell, the academic departure of this thesis. The research
& High, 2012). Gauntlett and Holzwarth (2006) add setup as explained in the next two chapters is based
to this by stating that visual methods make it easier on this theoretical framework.
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 Findings
From 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.
13
3. Problem framework
 Gotong Royong - Working together
3. Problem framework
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.
16
Chapter 3: Problem framework
3.2 Research significance and knowledge gap for
collaborating partners
This 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.
 Gotong Royong - Working together
Figure 3.1 Institutional embedding
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?
Chapter 3: Problem framework
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 Findings
To 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.
17
4. Research design
 Gotong Royong - Working together
4. Research design
4.1 Introduction
For 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-
20
Chapter 4: Research design
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.
 Gotong Royong - Working together
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 design
It 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-
Figure 4.1 Based on Duchhart’s integrated model (2007)
Chapter 4: Research design
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-
21
 Gotong Royong - Working together
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
22
Chapter 4: Research design
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 synthesis
The 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.
 Gotong Royong - Working together
4.7 Limitations
In 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
Chapter 4: Research design
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.
23
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 4: Research design

Transformative research design

Status Description
Ownership 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.

Role Description
Participant 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 Figure 4.2 Role of the landscape architect
suggestions by the other
parties.
Researcher/designer Works mostly independ-
ent on the activity. Has
regular communication
with the other parties.

24
 Gotong Royong - Working together
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-
Chapter 4: Research design
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.
25
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 4: Research design

Transformative research design

Figure 4.3 Role of IPB and the NGO

26
 Gotong Royong - Working together
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-
Chapter 4: Research design
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.
27
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 4: Research design

Transformative research design

Figure 4.4 Role of the kampung participants

28
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 4: Research design

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.

29
 Gotong Royong - Working together
Figure 4.5 Workshop adaptation
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 methods
According 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 study
The 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-
30
Chapter 4: Research design
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
 Gotong Royong - Working together
Figure 4.6 Research set up
Drawing; RTD – draw your dream.
Photoshop workshop & Timeline workshop
The 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.
Chapter 4: Research design
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.
31
5. Landscape analysis
 Gotong Royong - Working together
5. Landscape analysis
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
34
Chapter 5: Landscape analysis
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 information
Before 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.
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

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

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

35
 Gotong Royong - Working together
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.
36
Chapter 5: Landscape analysis
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.
 Gotong Royong - Working together
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.
Figure 5.4 Puncak elevation cross-section model
Chapter 5: Landscape analysis
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.
37
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

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

As seen in figure 5.5 and figure 5.6, the landscape

in Puncak changed drastically over a short period of
time.

38
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

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

39
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

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 .

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

Figure 5.8 Aerial photos along Puncak Pass (google earch, 2006)

40
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

Figure 5.9 Aerial photos along Puncak Pass (google earch, 2010)

Figure 5.10 Aerial photos along Puncak Pass (google earch, 2014)

41
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

Legend

Urban centre-Kampung
Gunung Mas

Villas & touristic area

Tea plantations on ap-

prox. 1000-1500m
Rainforest on steep
slopes
Stream valleys

Puncak pass-main road

Figure 5.11 Landscpae units analysis on Puncak scale

42
Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

43
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

B: Urban centre
along the Puncak
pass
A: Villas in the hills C: Stream valleys

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

Soil lithosols soil andosols and lithosols andosols and lthosol

soil soil

Land use villas and dryland agriculture hotels, restaurants, living, transport
shops, markets along the
main road
Water level wet staturated land and big amounts of big amounts of rainwa- wet staturated land
rainwater flows downhill ter flows downhill

Environmental pollution of streams, surface hardening, pollution of streams, clogs with sedimentat
problems due to urban expansion enhances erosion surface hardening and garbage, vegetat
urbanisation along streams decreas

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

44
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

Kampung Gunung Mas

D: Tea plantations E: Rainforest on the steep slopes

0m mean height of +1200m mean height of +1250m

ls andosol soil, good permeability and high basement lava rock with thin top layer
amount of organic particles yet suscepti-
ble to erosion
living, tea fields National Park owned by the Indonesian state
high ecological value, logging

wet staturated land and big amounts of wet staturated land big amounts of rain-
rainwater flows downhill water flows downhill

tion landslides, careless tourism, pollution of deforestation, landslides, soil degradation

tion streams
ses

45
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

Mosque

Building

Fish pond

River

Tea plantation

Forest

Figure 5.13 Land use map of kampung

5.3 Kampung scale 5.3.1 Landscape units

Gunung Mas is one of the 11 kampungs in Puncak Gunung Mas consists of five major landscape units
regency, belong to Tugu Selatan sub-district. The i.e. rainforest on the steep slopes, tea planation,
kampung is located as the first village along the river steam valleys, villas in the tourist area and the kam-
stream on the edge of the conservation zones. Most pung centre. The interrelationships between differ-
of the 1100 inhabitants in Kampung are working in ent landscape units are elaborated in the cross-sec-
the tea plantation surrounded. The Tea Company has tion by explaining landscape features, their functions
the “Land Cultivation Rights” (Hak Guna Usaha/ and user groups and different problems and conse-
HGU in Bahasa) which given by the state in a period quences that occur (see figure 5.21-5.33).
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.

46
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

Figure 5.14 Landscape units analysis on Gunung Mas

Legend

Urban centre-Kampung
Gunung Mas

Villas & touristic area

Tea plantations on ap-

prox. 1000-1500m
Rainforest on steep
slopes
Stream valleys

47
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

Landscape unit A - Rainforest on the steep slopes

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).

Landscape features Functions User groups

Trees Wood, shade Community

48 Figure 5.16 Figure 5.17

 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

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

Problems Consequences

Illegal collection of fuelwood, garbage dumping near Deforestration, soil erosion

the edge of kampung and forest

Figure 5.18
49
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

Landscape unit B - Tea plantations

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).

Landscape features Functions User groups

Tea plantation Tea production Tea workers

Sandy and stoney path Access along the tea fields Tea workers
Tourists

Trees Shade None

50 Figure 5.20 Soil erosion in tea field Figure 5.21 Tourist activities in tea field
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

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

Problems Consequences

Soil reosion Decreased production

Garbage dumping along roads Polluted environment,

less tea production

None
None

Figure 5.22 Tea plantation environment 51

 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

Landscape unit C - Kampung located in the valley

Due to the kampung was located in the valley along 5.24).

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

Landscape features Functions User groups

Trees Wood, shade Community

Residential houses Living Family

Tourist villas Tourist service buildings Tourists

Tea factory Tourist museum Tourists

Stoney roads Access along the kampung and tour- Community and tourists
ist area
Home garden Economic plants Family

Fish pond Fish farming Community

52 Figure 5.24 Garbage in Kampung Figure 5.25 Water runoff along street
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

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

Problems Consequences

None None

Garbage around houses Garbage dumping in the river

Careless tourist littering garbage in the Kampung Increased garbage in the kampung

None None

Floods on the road Water run-off, and polluted drinking wa-

ter
None None

Polluted water Less fish production

Figure 5.26 Kampung environment 53

 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

Landscape unit D - Cisampai river banks

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 ).

Landscape features Functions User groups

Trees Fruits, wood, shade Community

Canal Fishing, washing, playing, drinking Community, tourists

water resource

Cultivated land Fruits, vegetables, spices Community

Sandy and stoney roads Access along the tea field and Community and tourists
Kampung

54 Figure 5.28 Garbage in the river Figure 5.29 Source of water

 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

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

Problems Consequences

Illegal collection of fuelwood, garbage dumping in the Increased water run-off

river Increased sedimentation in the river

Garbage in the river Polluted environment, increased sedi-

mentation

Land cover change Soil erosion

None None

Figure 5.30 River banks environment 55

 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

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).

Tea Company Local government Local NGO Inhabitants

(Kepala Desa) (Ciliwung institute)

Management Management Communition with Live

IPB University to
connect the other
Land use right stakeholders Working in the tea planation

Facilitating actions
to protect Puncak
area

Table 5.1 Power of different stakeholders

56
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

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).

Figure 5.31 Home garden system

Figure 5.32 Model of a farming system

57
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

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).

Figure 5.33 Cross-section of the main street in kampung

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

58
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

Figure 5.36 Cross-section of kampung

Drinking water supply

Figure 5.37 Water flow analysis

59
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

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- Play badminton
ing leisure time, the majority activities are happening
outdoor.

Sell goods

Figure 5.38 Ourdoor activities in Gunung Mas

60
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

Dry laundry

Wedding ceremony

Chatting

Eating

61
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

Terraces close to river banks

Water supplys system

Edge of kampung and tourist area

Tea factory

Figure 5.39 Photos displaying the qualities and opportunities in Kam-

pung

62
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

Stone pavement on street

Tea plantation (soil erosion occurs) Tourist area (horse riding)

Mosque
Tea plantation (garbage dumping along road)

63
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

Tourist horse riding through tea plantation People playing badminton in sport hall

Wedding ceremony tent on the street

Figure 5.40 Photos displaying the activities and opportunities in Kam-

pung

64
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

Children playing badminton

Children playing on street

Women chatting outdoor

65
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

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.

66
Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 5: Landscape analysis

67
 6. People-centred
landscape based design
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning

6 . Participatory environmental planning

6.1 Introduction
Before 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.
Figure 6.1 Cooperative institutions (Ciliwung insitution, IPB Univer-
sity)
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, 6.2 Other workshops
this is the so-called Action Group.
Propose
Two action group meetings were held to support the Learn from local participatory workshop experience
group going forward, in which Photoshop modifica- Make first step for adaptation
tion and long-term thinking got introduced.
Result
To validate the workshop results 30 questionnaires 100% male participants
were conducted alongside several observation points Unequal discussion, mostly dominate by one or two
to understand the local landscape. person
The maps made by participants were based on per-
The following sub question is being answered in this sonal scale experience, which made the results diffi-
chapter. cult to verify.
What are the environmental problems and wishes Conclusion
and needs of the inhabitants of Kampung Gunung There is a need for equal discussion during the work-
Mas? shop.
In addition, the opinion from female participants
also needs to be taken into account.

70
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning

Figure 6.2 IPB presenting their workshop findings

Figure 6.3 IPB workshop process

71
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning

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

Figure 6.5 Facilitator training process

72
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning

Computer station

U-form

Figure 6.6 ‘U’ shape chaires layout in the center surrounded by four desks which provides flexible transformation opportunity between large and small
groups
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
Masalah Tujuan Bagaimana Aksi
Kesulitan lingkungan apa yang Dengan mempertimbangkan Melalui kerangka konsep program
Kampung Anda hadapi? Jenis pembangunan yang mencapainya? aksi nyata dikembangkan . Setiap
masalah apa yang telah Anda berkesinambungan dari Kampung Bagaimana Anda akan mencapai program terdiri dari beberapa
temukan dalam kaitannya dengan Anda, apa yang ingin Anda capai? tujuan ini? Langkah-langkah yang proyek .

Awi helped us with a location, writing the workshop

lingkungan ? Bayangkan Kampung Anda yang
baik dan ideal. Seperti apa Kampung
ini akan terlihat? Bagaimana
lingkungan dapat dilindungi,
sekarang dan di masa depan?
Masalah apa yang ingin Anda
diperlukan dapat divisualisasikan
dalam peta dan gambar. Proses
visualisasi akan membantu Anda
untuk menemukan pertentangan
dalam rencana Anda.

report and adapting the program to the local context.

pecahkan dan kapan?

We are very grateful with this team on our side and

its previous experience with community workshops.

According to the original workshop, each facilitator Workshop:

Menuju Kampung Gunung Mas

has a different role. Amin was the lead facilitator

yang berkelanjutan
Peserta : 25 orang dari KampungGunungMas

throughout the Friday and Saturday. Due to personal

Fasilitator : Tedja Kusumah, Muhammad Aminuddin,
Lutfia Nursetya, Agnisaa Dwi,
Erik Mulyana
Tempat : SDN Gunung Mas

reasons of Amin his task was adopted by Erik on Makan Siang : 12:40 , 12 , 13 April
Waktu : 13:00-17:00, 11 April
8:00-16:00, 12 April

Sunday. The workshop consists of exercises that are

8:00-16:00, 13 April

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 6.7 Workshop poster
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.

73
 Gotong Royong - Working together
6.4 Intermezzo - Adaptations
Figure 6.8 Drawing in PowerPoint presentation for map making assignments
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).
74
Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning
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
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning

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

• 15menit

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

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).

Figure 6.9 PowerPoint presentation set up during the workshop

75
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning

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

76
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning

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

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.

77
 Gotong Royong - Working together
6.5 PEP workshop - day 1
Friday 11th of April 2014
Official opening
Introduction day 1
Video 1:
Environmental problems
Base map
Problem map
Summary day 1 Write report day 1
Preview day 2 Prepare day 2
Figure 6.13 Flow diagram of 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
Description
This 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).
Purpose
The purpose of this exercise is to stimulate discussion
between the participants about environmental
78
Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning
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.
Conclusion
The 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 water
Lack of environmental awareness
Overexploitation of natural resources
Planting of pine trees making adjacent
agricultural land less productive
Suboptimal 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 place
Tourists 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.
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning

Drawing the base map

Description
For 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.

Purpose
Through 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.

Conclusion
The 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

Figure 6.15 Problem map of Kampung Gunung Mas

Figure 6.14 Base map of Kampung Gunung Mas

79
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning

Figure 6.16 Workshop process (video watching)

Figure 6.17 Workshop process (Bas map making)

80
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning

Figure 6.18 Workshop process (Map discussion)

81
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning

Drawing the problem map

Description
The 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

82
Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning

83
 Gotong Royong - Working together
6.7 PEP workshop - day 2
Saturday 12th of April 2014
Review day 1
Introduction day 2
Video 2:
Man-nature relations
Problem tree
Field trip
Video 3:
Working together
Summary day 2 Write report day 2
Preview day 3 Prepare day 3
Figure 6.20 Flow diagram of day 2
Introduction
For 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
Description
The 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
84
Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning
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).
Conclusion
The 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 washing
Clean 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
places
There is a need for raising public awareness trough
a campaign
People should replant the forest (reforestation)
People should recycle their garbage and compost or-
ganic waste
People should utilize land in a more sustainable way
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning

Making a problem tree problems and the links between them.

Description
For this exercise the participants elaborated on their Results
environmental problems by determining the causes Original problem tree
and effects. The four small groups each make a prob- Translated problem tree
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

85
 Gotong Royong - Working together
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.
86
Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning
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 woodland
Surface runoff in the streets
What caused these problems?
The lack of rules on waste disposal
Tree cutting
The 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:
What problems did you find in your area?
Lots of garbage is dumped in the Cisampai river by
tourists
Garbage piles up on vacant land
Air pollution
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning

What caused these problems? The loss of animal habitat is very disturbing and
dangerous for people
No garbage disposal place or it is too far away
No garbage sorting facilities and garbage manage-
ment
Group 4 - Area 4:
What are the effects of these problems?
What problems did you find in your area?
Garbage degrades the river and tourist areas
Air pollution in the kampung
Many flies and mosquitoes
Garbage in the tea fields and Cisampai river

What solutions did you observe?

A Garbage Bank can solve the garbage management
problem
There is a need for specialized organisation to man-
age the waste
What is the opinion of people living in the area?
The community wish for funding to purchase new
garbage management facilities
People propose to burn trash in the dry season
Group 3 - Area 3:
What problems did you find in your area?
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
What are the effects of these problems?
What caused these problems?
Smoke from fuelwood when cooking
Vehicle exhausts
Horse manure
What are the effects of these problems?
The smell is unbearable
It makes it harder to breath clean air
What solutions did you observe?
Awareness programs for people to live clean
What is the opinion of people living in the area?
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

The raptor now hunts the village community

What solutions did you observe?

Reforestation in the logging areas

Restoration of the forest as a habitat for wild animals

What is the opinion of people living in the area?

87
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning

Group1 Group2

Group3 Group4

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

88
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning

Figure 6.24 Selected 15 problem photos

89
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning

6.8 PEP workshop - day 3

Review day 1, day 2 Sunday 13th of April 2014

Introduction day 3 Video assignment 4: Making of thematic maps

Initially we would like to start day 3 with an example video
of how to draw thematic maps. The purpose of this is to
Video 4:
Making of maps
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-
Four thematic maps cise. The other facilitators agreed with this approach and
consequently the video was excluded from the program.
Conflict maps
Map exercise: 4 maps
Description
Environment For this exercise the participants were divided into four
development plan 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),
Draw your dream 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
Action plan conclusions are listed below.

Purpose
Election of Action The purpose of this exercise for the participants is to ap-
Group
ply the gathered knowledge of day 1 and day 2. By draw-
ing thematic maps they discover what they value in their
Evaluation and closing Write report day 3 environment. This is necessary to start thinking about en-
Prepare Photoshop
workshop vironmental development.
The aim for each group is explained below:

Figure 6.25 Flow diagram of day 3 In the original Green Towns Workshop this group maps
the suitability for agricultural land. To modify this exercise
Introduction
to meet our research needs we chose a wider scope. We
The main goal of the third and final day is to draw the en-
felt that it should cover more than just agriculture as the
vironment development plan and to make an action plan.
inhabitants have a more extensive economic relationship
Prior to this, the participants will draw several maps that
with the environment. For example they gain resources
will be combined to form the environment development
and income from forestry, bee-farming, tea fields and
plan. For this we adopted the original exercise of ‘mak-
horticulture.
ing 4 maps’, in which the participants map the resources,
urban development areas, land protection and worst-case
The Yellow Group draws a map that shows which are-
scenario. It was interesting to try this method, which lays
as are suitable and desirable for urban development. The
at the foundation of landscape-based design, with the
participants also included the desired location for new
participants who are unfamiliar with this method. Finally
garbage management facilities and infrastructures.
an action group of 8 people was elected to carry out the
action plan. At the end of the day the participants evaluat-
The Blue Group draws a map of the areas that should be
ed the entire workshop. The Green Towns Workshop was
protected. These areas have high environmental value and
‘officially’ closed and we showed gratitude to the partici-
should be protected from further degradation.
pants by handing out diplomas. In return the participants
responded satisfied to the work they achieved.
The Red Group provides a counterpart for the Blue
Group; this group draws a map of the areas that will face
90
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning

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

further degradation if no action is taken. This map is the 3. Improve the cultural building
so-called ‘zero map’ of ‘worst-case scenario map’. (Rumah Madrasa)
4. Establish a new kiosk to sell goods to tourists
Conclusion 5. Repair public toilets
The map making exercise provides a wide array of infor-
mation. The participants discuss on what they would like Blue Group – Land protection areas
to improve in their environment. During the process they The participants listed the following areas that they think
relinked to the problem map, problem tree and their find- should be protected:
ings in the field. This gives a coherent research process in
which the participants own the knowledge. 1. Forests
2. Their homes
Results 3. Cemetery
Green Group – Resources and income from the en- 4. Tea plantation
vironment 5. Cisampai river
The participants listed the following resources and in-
come: Red Group – Zero map; what happens if we do noth-
1. Wood from the forest ing?
2. Tea fields The participants listed the following scenarios:
3. Cultivating vegetables, agriculture and
horticulture 1. Forest area will continue to decrease in size
4. Cultivation of flowers and fruit by other development
5. Livestock and others; honey bees, fish, 2. As a results, landslides will occur more often
chicken, goat, song birds 3. The garbage will narrow the Cisampai river,
reducing its runoff capacity
Yellow Group – Suitable areas for urban development
The participants listed the following points regarding ur- Making of conflict maps
ban development: Description
The conflict maps are a continuation of the previous ex-
1. Repairing of several roads ercise. The participants compare the different maps to
2. Development of a landfill facility determine areas of conflicting interests. This will result

91
 Gotong Royong - Working together
Figure 6.29 Results of Resources and income map and Urban devel-
opment map
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.
92
Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning
Figure 6.30 Map making assigment introduction slide on PowerPoint
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 1
There is a conflict between bee farming and housing de-
velopment; the participants value the economic potential
 Gotong Royong - Working together
Figure 6.32 Results of Land protection areas map and Zero map
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.
Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning
Figure 6.33 Map making assigment introduction slide on PowerPoint
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.
93
 Gotong Royong - Working together
Draw your dream
Description
It 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 fruits and medicinal plants
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 plan the participants are eager to take action to make the
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.
Purpose
The 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
94
Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning
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 trees
River 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,
- 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 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.
 Gotong Royong - Working together
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 Mas responded to be very satisfied with their achieve-
garbage
3. Composting of organic waste
4. Planting medicinal plants and ornamental Conclusions PEP workshop
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
Figure 6.35 Everybody received their Green Towns Workshop diploma
Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning
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
ments the past three days.
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.
95
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning

Figure 6.36 Development plan of Kampung Gunung Mas

96
Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning

97
 Gotong Royong - Working together
6.9 Photoshop workshop
Introduction
To 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 leader
Facilitator 2: Thomas van den Berg – presenter
Facilitator 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
98
Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning
kampung (see 6.3).
Process
Figure 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.
Conclusion
This 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
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning

Presentation screen

Computer station

Figure 6.37 Photoshop workshop process

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)
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.

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.

Discussion
Although 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

99
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning

Start The worst scenario

What happens if no action is

taken?

Action!
Action group Photographs of problem areas

Choosing tools for the implementation

Criteria for action Desired future

Figure 6.38 Photoshop workshop assigment explaination PowerPoint

slide

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

Figure 6.41 Four selected problem photos and their photoshop results

100
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning

Figure 6.40 Live Photoshop process

101
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning

6.10 Timeline workshop

Introduction

14 total 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-

April 2014 shop is designed to further help the community implement
their action plan after the first action day. The main goal of this
Figure 6.42 Timeline Workshop process 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 6.43 Results of Photoshop workshop and Action day on PowerPoint to encourage people to continue their
actions
102
 Gotong Royong - Working together
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 leader
Thomas van den Berg – presenter
Hanshu Liu – Photoshop
Layout
To 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.
Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning
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.
Discussion
There 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.
103
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning

Figure 6.44 Results of Timeline Workshop

104
Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning

105
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning

6.11 Other activities

Presentation of environment development plan Evaluation

- Regional workshop Puncak IPB
- Evaluation with facilitators
Questionnaires After the workshop the methodology and results
To validate the PEP workshop results we conduct were handed over to IPB and the NGO.
30 questionnaires in Kampung Gunung Mas (see fig-
ure). In this way we get a larger sample of the Kam- - Evaluation with community development
pung population. The questionnaires are filled in by program
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

106
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 6: Participatory environmental planning

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.

107
7. Translation
 Gotong Royong - Working together
Figure 7.1 Data accumulation within the research through designing process
• What is the problem – allow the problem
definition to arise from the participants (PRA) (prob-
lem tree, problem map)
From research to design
The 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
110
Chapter 7: Accumulation
Findings
In 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
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 7: Accumulation

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.

Figure 7.2 Presentation in the Indonesian Embassy

111
8. Design
 Gotong Royong - Working together
Home garden Fish pond
Figure 8.1 Economic activities in Gunung Mas (based on workshop results and observation)
Shade Small square
Figure 8.2 Socul-cultural perspective (Based on workshop results and observation)
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)
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-
114
Chapter 8: Design
Complex forest garden Tea plantation
Socializing
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 outcomes
Looking 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
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 8: Design

inhabitants have their home garden which contains 8.3 Design principles
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 8.4 Recycle
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
Figure 8.5 Composting
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

Figure 8.6 Multi-functional open space
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 Figure 8.7 Terrace
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- Figure 8.8 Plant trees
estry traditional home garden and mix garden. In
the following paragraph, the five design principles
area formulated based on the research outcomes.
115
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 8: Design

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

8.3.1 Advantages and limitations of all comprehensive and solutions solve more problems
design interventions at once.

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
116
Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 8: Design

117
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 8: Design

Trees on the benches of terraces: Trees along the river: Composting:

- erosion control - compost generates

- water run off control - erosion control nutrients for crops
- reduce slope length - provide shade and decoration
- improve soil fertility - production of fruit, wood
- production of fruit, wood, and grass

8.3.2 Spatial relations

The figure above illustrates the spatial relationship
and benefit of the different design principles.

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

118
Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 8: Design

Garbage reuse: Reforestation:

- composting - answer to illegal logging

- construction materials - erosion control
- products to sell to tourists - water run-off control
- improve soil fertility

119
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 8: Design

8.3.3Recycling

2 to 10 days

2 to 5 months
8.11.1 Composting

2 to 5 months

3 to 14 months

1 to 12 years

59 to 80 years 8.11.2 Reuse of tires for terrace

construction

15 to 1000
years

10 3 2.7 27 275 2,750 27,500 Does not

days months years years years years years decompost

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 8.11.3 Reuse of plastic bags
for commercial products
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 8.11.4 Reuse of plastic bottles
for construction
construct walls and parts of terraces.
Figure 8.11 Garbage decompose timeline (adapted from Decay rates and celeration, 2012)
Photos 8.11.1-8.11.4 (serveral sources)

120
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 8: Design

8.3.4 Composting

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.

121
 Gotong Royong - Working together 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.
Play badminton

Sell goods

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

122
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 8: Design

Dry laundry

Wedding ceremony

Socialize

123
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 8: Design

8.3.6 Terracing

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

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.
- 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

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:

124
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 8: Design

8.3.7 Plant trees

Rainfall
Wood production

Wind/dust

Food production

Evapotranspiration Shelter

Litter

Nutrients
soil protection

Nuturients Nuturients
Drainage

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

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)

125
 Gotong Royong - Working together
Tree planting on edge Cultivation land
of terrace
Cross-sectional view of hedgerow tree planting along contour line of terrace (Adapted from Humanity Development Library, 2014)
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
126
Chapter 8: Design
Tree planting on edge
of terrace
Figure 8.16
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).
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 8: Design

Function Food Building

(Fruits, materials
Ornamentals Medicinals
vegetables, and
Spices) fuelwood
Vegetation species

Acacia auriculiformis

Albizzia falcata

Bambuseae (Bamboo)

Calliandra calothyrsus

Cosmos caudatus (Randa midang)

Clitoria laurifolia

Gmelina arborea

Indigofera endecaphylla

Indigofera hiesuta

Hydrangea macrophylla

Lagerstroemia speciosa

Manihot esculenta crantz(Cassava)

Mikania scandens

Musa (banana)

Parkia speciosa

Pengelasan saintifik (Dedap)

Perseu america (advocado)

Rubrum piperis (Chili pepper)

Senna siamea

Swietenia mahagoni

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)

127
 Gotong Royong - Working together 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)

128
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 8: Design

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

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
Least safety terrace construction
distance from river bank around From figure 8.17 to 8.23, the construction details
1m area shown. The terrace also provides as an output
for larger non-organic garbage. For example tires and
Water level during rain in rain season 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
Normal water level
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
Figure 8.24 Least safety distance from river bank to terrace (based on
observation results)
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).

129
 Gotong Royong - Working together
Working from 7am until 15pm
Monday to Saturday
Figure 8.25 Family member (Based on Indonesia Family life Survey, 2014)
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
130
Chapter 8: Design
Working from 7am until 15pm
Monday to Saturday
Studying from 7am till 11am
Monday to Friday
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.
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 8: Design

6 am
Time Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday

8 pm

Father

Mother

Children

Work or study time

Free time

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

131
 Gotong Royong - Working together
House unit
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 scale
Looking at the street scale, planting ornamental
plants near entrance and along street makes the
kampung environment more attractive.
8.4.3 Kampung scale
At the Kampung scale, the combinations of dif-
ferent design principles are on site implemented
in different areas. The location is supported by the
132
Street scale Kampung scale
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 embedding
Through the workshop and afterwards activities, the
institutional embedding is built among the kampung
inhabitants, Tea Company, IPB University, and the
local NGO.
 Gotong Royong - Working together

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.

133
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 8: Design

8.5 Detail designs

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

134
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 8: Design

Terrace

Gatbage bin

Garbage collection

Composting

Home garden

Open space

Tourist service building

Fish pond

Residential building

Mosque

2
Tea plantation

Forest

135
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 8: Design

10m

Figure 8.29 Area 1: Kampung center

Figure 8.30 Artistic impression of composting

behind residential house

90cm 150cm

Figure 8.31 Composting box (Kompos Keranjang

90cm (Google, 2014) Takatura, 2011)

136
 Gotong Royong - Working together 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)

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

Who´s responsible:
Figure 8.35 Reuse of plastic bottle by steps (Adapted from Lipsticka-
ndchopsticks, 2014)
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.

137
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 8: Design

A' A'

10m

Figure 8.36 Area 2: Multi-functional open space

Open space

A
Figure 8.37 Cross section of multi-functional open space

138
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 8: Design

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.

Figure 8.38 Artistic impression of multi-functional open space

Open space

A'

139
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 8: Design

Figure 8.39 Current garbage dumping sites

Figure 8.41 Current situation

Figure 8.40 Artistic impression of one open space Figure 8.42 Location of the open space

140
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 8: Design

Figure 8.44 Current situation

Figure 8.43 Artistic impression of one open space Figure 8.45 Location of the open space

Figure 8.47 Current situation

Figure 8.46 Artistic impression of one open space Figure 8.48 Location of the open space

oreri odit

141
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 8: Design

A'

Figure 8.49 Area 3: Terracing river banks

Tree planting on the edge Cultivation land

Figure 8.50 Cross section of terracing river banks

142
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 8: Design

Aim: the construction of the terrace.

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.
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.

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

Recycle garbage separation

5m
A'

143
 Gotong Royong - Working together
Figure 8.51 current river banks
Figure 8.52 Artistic impression of terracing river banks
144
Chapter 8: Design
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.
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 8: Design

Plastic pottle Tire Other waste

1.5m

0.9m

Figure 8.54 Garbage separation facility

Figure 8.53 Current situation

of abandoned space near river
banks

Figure 8.55 Artistic impression

of garbage collection and sepa-
ration site

145
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 8: Design

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

Who´s responsible:
Kampung inhabitants
Necessities:
Seeds and recyclable garbage

10m

Figure 8.56 Area 4: Kampung entrance

Figure 8.57 Artistic impression of Kampung entrance

146
 Gotong Royong - Working together
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
Chapter 8: Design
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.
147
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 8: Design

Current garbage dumping area

Tourist service building

Fish pond

Residential building

Mosque

Tea plantation

Forest

Figure 8.58 Current situation

Open space

Tourist service building

Fish pond

Residential building

Mosque

Tea plantation

Forest

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

148
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 8: Design

Composting

Home garden

Open space

Tourist service building

Fish pond

Residential building

Mosque

Tea plantation

Forest

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

Terraces

Garbage bin

Garbage collection

Composting

Home garden

Open space

Tourist service building

Fish pond

Residential building

Mosque

Tea plantation

Forest

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

149
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 8: Design

Recycle garbage

Extra waste

Extra waste

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

150
Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 8: Design

Recycle garbage

Extra waste

Garbage collection route

Garbage truck route

Terraces

Garbage bin

Garbage collection

Composting

Home garden

Open space

Tourist service building

Fish pond

Residential building

Mosque

Tea plantation
Recycle garbage Forest

151
 Gotong Royong - Working together

152
Gotong Royong - Working together

9. Conclusion
& Discussion

153
 Gotong Royong - Working together
9. Conclusion
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-
154
Chapter 9: Conclusion & discussion
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
 Gotong Royong - Working together
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
Chapter 9: Conclusion & discussion
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
155
 Gotong Royong - Working together

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.

156
Gotong Royong - Working together

157
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 9: Conclusion & discussion

Figure 9.1 Afterwards recommendations

158
Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 9: Conclusion & discussion

159
 Gotong Royong - Working together
Discussion
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.
160
Chapter 9: Conclusion & discussion
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
 Gotong Royong - Working together Chapter 9: Conclusion & discussion

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.

161
 Gotong Royong - Working together

162
Gotong Royong - Working together

163
 Gotong Royong - Working together
References
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,
164
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-
 Gotong Royong - Working together
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.
165
 Gotong Royong - Working together
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]
166
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
 Gotong Royong - Working together

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.

167
 Gotong Royong - Working together

List of figures

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]

Figure 8.9 is adapted from

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]

Figure 8.10 is adapted from

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

Figure 8.11 is adapted from

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
168
 Gotong Royong - Working together

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 8.12 is adapted from

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]

Figure 8.15 is adapted from

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

Figure 8.16 is adapted from

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]

Figure 8.21 is adapted from

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]

Figure 8.22 is adapted from

Doornewaard. J (1991) Dieng Highlands, Central Jave, a landscape plan for an intensively cultivated highland
region in Central Java, Indonesia. M.S. thesis.
169
 Gotong Royong - Working together

Figure 8.24 is adapted from

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

170
 Gotong Royong - Working together

Appendix list

3 Day workshop Green Towns Workshop video

Photos of Maps
PowerPoint (English, Bahasa)
Poster
Program (English, Bahasa)
Field record sheet (English, Bahasa)
Invitation letter
List of written on flipcharts
Report of workshop (English, Bahasa)
Registration form (English, Bahasa)
Green Towns Workshop Diploma

Facilitator training PowerPoint

Other activities Evaluation form (English, Bahasa)

Questionnaire (English, Bahasa)
Questionnaires results
Observation table

Photoshop workshop Problems

Solution
PowerPoint (English, Bahasa)

Timeline workshop PowerPoint

Timeline

Video Workshop video

Kampung video

171
 Gotong Royong - Working together

172