Applying Integrated Ecological Planning and ALIT For Developing Countries

Green Imp act Indonesia
Integrated U rban, D rainage and Environm ental

Planning and D esign
CP: Gu nawa n Ta nuwidjaja MSc, Env, Mg t, (NUS) B.Arch
(ITB)
Email: g u nteit b@ ya ho o.com,
Web:ht tp://g reeni mpac tind o. word press.com/ab ou t/
Applying Integrated Ecologi cal Planning a nd

Adaptive Landscape Evaluation Tool for Developing
Countrie s i n the Framework of Sustainable Spatial
Planning and Development, Study Ca se Bintan
I sland, I ndone sia
W ritten by :
1
Tanu widjaja, Gun awan. & 2 Malon e-L ee, L ai Choo.
1
MSc. Env ironment al Managem ent (NUS), S. T. (ITB)
Urban Planner & Researcher, Green Impact Indonesia,
Integrated Urban, Drainage and Environmental - Planning and Design Studio
Mobile: +62 812 212 20842
Em ail: gunt eitb@y ahoo.com
2
Ph.D. (Toky o), Masters U rban Planning (Sydney ), B.Sc R eal Est ate (NUS)
Direct or of Centre f or Sust ainable Asian Cities
School of Design and Env ironm ent, National U niv ersity of Singapore
Em ail: sdem alon@nus. edu.sg
Presented in:
Abstr act. Developing countries, like Indonesia, f ace great dev elopm ent
press ure due to economic developm ent f or great num ber of populations.
Various env ironmental problems later emerge due to unplanned,
unc ontrolled and uns ustainable land use dev elopment as well as sev ere
env ironm ent al destructions. The need f or integrated ec ologic al planning
actually emerges from this concern.
The integrated ec ological planning could be def ined as “Planning proc ess
that cons ider the ecological condition, env ironm ental carry ing capacity ,
and other s ocial economy that af f ect the location. Lat er on, int egration of
2 Tanuwidjaja, Gunawan. & M alone-Lee, Lai Ch oo
infrastructure planning such as water management, mass transportation,

waste management, energy conserv ation, etc. Involvement of
stakeholders would be integrated in the proc ess application. “
The real ecological planning application f ace constraints s uch as the lack
of political will, lack of expertise, tools, res earch, and funding in
gov ernment as well as cons ultants. But still t he int egrated ec ological
planning should be applied to ac hiev e the more s ustainable dev elopm ent
as well as to conserv e of strategic or important ecological areas.
One of the important steps of ecological planning is the landsc ape

evaluation methodology . The ev aluation method researc h was started in
2005, f or National Univ ersity of Singapore, MSc Environmental
Managem ent program. Later t hrough real applic ation, we redef ine the
method with real application in other planning projects in ot her countries.
Our researc h involv es identify ing the k ey elements of all ev aluation

methods, which were lat er distilled and ref ined to build on Adaptive
Landscape Evaluation Tool or ”ALi T”. The strengths of sy stem lie mainly
in establishing evaluation met hods, adaptiv e list of data, and scoring
thres holds t hat embraces sustainable land dev elopm ent principles. The
method was validated in Bintan Buyu, Bintan Island, Indones ia and
prov en to be applicable f or loc al gov ernm ent. While the criteria and other
scoring system would need to be adjust ed to eac h dif f erent cases.
The proposed sy stem is comprehensive y et manageable and practic able.

It encom pass es f our important elements as part of the development and
evaluation process, namely, initial sec ondary data collection, rapid survey
to v erify critical data, m ulti-disc iplinary analysis with Geographic
Information System (GI S), and lastly , stakeholders’ inputs. The authors
believ e that ALi T can be a very useful tool for reducing environmental
destruction while acc om modating economic dev elopment in dev eloping
countries.
We understands that there are c onstrains in method application due to

lack of politic al will as well as limited f unding to gather all env ironmental,
social and economic al as pects. Bec ause of that, the v ision f or dev eloping
Sust ainable Spatial Planning must be made f irst bet ween stak eholders of
the region comprising Public, People and Priv ate (Government, the
People and the Priv ate sect or). And Integrat ed Spatial Planning with
Focus on Ec ological Approach would be t he near-f uture t rend for the
World.
Keywords: Integrated Ecological Planning, Landsc ape Evaluation, Land

Evaluation, Sust ainable Planning, Sustainable Land Development.
Applying Integrated E cological Planning and Adaptive 3
Land scape E valuation Tool for Developing Count ries in the Frame work
of Su stainable Spatial Planning and Developm ent, Study Ca se Bintan
I sland, Indonesia
1 Introduction
In the p re sen t yea r, t he wo rld face s extreme en vironmental problems
that threat en it s livelihood. The problem s are re sou rce depletion, global
clim ate change, extinction of plant s a nd anim als, lo ss of wildlife habitats,
increasing pollution, and povert y (M iller, 2003). We believe that the se
environmental issues were ca u sed by 2 main factors, which were
exponential population growth and the ri se of anth ropo cent ri sm and
liberalism.
First, the world’s population ha s increased e xponentially from 2.521

billion in 1950 to 6.782 billion in 2009. With the current population
gro wth, it wa s predicted to reach 9 billion by 2040 and to put more
pre ssu re to the Ea rth. Further, the world’s population wa s not
dist ributed eq ually according to a vailability of resource s. Thi s al so
stre sse d to ce rtain areas on Earth. 1
Secondly, we al so believe that ant hrop ocentri sm and liberalism justify

hum an conduct to the un sustainable development. The
anthropocent ri sm sugg ested that “human beings a re the cent ral of the
universe and the nature is creat ed only to se rve hum an interest. ” This
wa s pa rallel to Liberalism which uph eld “the a utonomy of the individual
and political liberties”. Unfortunately, the se principal s we re u sed to justify
the ext rem e exploitation of the earth . 2
The current economic system wa s al so foun d unsu stainable because of

speculative and inefficient production; over-utilisation of non-ren e wable
reso urces and exce ssi ve pollution. Therefore, seve re re sou rce
depletion, biodiversity loss and increasing pollution happened. Similarly
to that, environmentalist s believed that if the im pact of great population,
un sust ainable con sum ption pattern and technological advan cem ent in
the wo rld were combined, enorm ou s environmental im pact would occur.
And finally, it would increase Ea rth’s environm ental vulnerability index
(Miller, 2003, Kaly et all, 2004; Kaly et all, 2005).
1
http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/popclockworld.htm l, estim ated by U nited States
Census Bureau on 5th Septem ber 2009;
http://au.encarta.m sn.com /encyclopedia_1461501471/Population_Explosion.htm l;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Population-m ilestones.jpg
2
http://dictionary.ref erence.com/;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/;
http://www.m erriam-webster.com/
Figure 1 Population Dens ity Map of the World. (So urce:

http://sedac .ciesin. org /wdc/ map _gallery.js p; Ce nter f or In tern ational Earth Scienc e
Infor mati on Ne twor k (CIESIN) Colu mbia Uni versit y, a nd Centro Int ernaci onal de
Agriculture Tropical (CIAT), Grid de d Pop ulatio n of Th e W orld (GP W) Versio n).
Figure 2 The C om bined Env ironment al Impact of Population,

Cons um ption Pattern and Tec hnologic al Advancem ent to the World.
(Sources: Miller, 200 3)
I sland, Indonesia
Figure 3 Env ironmental Vulnerability Index Map of the W orld. (So urce:
http://sedac .ciesin. org /wdc/ map _gallery.js p; K al y et all, 2004).
Land, a s o ne earth’s resources, also faces de velopment pressure. Due

to its limited supply and speculation activities, many important natu ral
area s were sacrificed for land developm ent. Eventually, this increa sed
rate s of defore station and dese rtification wo rldwide (Millennium
Eco system Assessm ent, 2005 )
Figure 4 The World’s Def orestation in 2000. (Source: Millennium Ecos yst em
Assessmen t, 2 00 5; htt p://i mag es.wri.org ).
Figure 5 The World’s Ant hropogenic Biomes (Land D ev elopment) in

2000. (So urce: htt p://sed ac.ciesin .org/wdc/map_g allery.jsp; Ellis, E.C. and N.
Rama n kut t y, 200 8).
I sland, Indonesia
Understanding the complexity of the developing count rie s cont ext, we

decided to evaluate the environm ental issue s in the count rie s fu rthe r in
this paper. Be side tho se facto rs mentioned abo ve, povert y al so created
great land and natu ral a rea conversion in the developing cou ntrie s.
Unfo rtunately, the se de veloping countries are m ostly located in the
“biodiversit y hot spot ” and affected by greater biodive rsity lo ss.
(Mulongoy K.J. & Chape S., 2004; UNEP-WCM C, 2002 - Wo rld Atla s of
Biodiversity; UNDP 2004 - Human De velopm ent Report 2004)
Figure 6 Distribution of GDP per capita in 1995. (Source: S achs & Malan ey,
2002).
Figure 7 Relationship bet ween Biodiv ersity Hotspot Location and

Dev eloping C ountries. Legend: Developing C ountries HDI = 0.27 – 0. 75.
(Sources: http:// maps.grida. no; Mulongo y K.J. & Ch ape S. , 2 00 4; UNEP- WCMC, 20 02 -
World Atlas of Bi odi versit y; UNDP 20 04 - Human De velo pment Rep ort 2 004)
One of real exam ple of e xten si ve defore station an d biodiversity loss is

Indone sia. Ext ensive defo restation has happened since 1950 s. In 1998,
it was repo rted that fort y percent of the forest s, which wa s repo rted in
1950, had been cleared. From 162 million ha fore st, only 98 million ha
fore st was left (FAO - Global Fore st Resources Asse ssme nt, 2005 ).
Fu rther, other repo rt s sho wed th at 1,708,750 to 1,871,500 ha of f ore sts

we re defo rested annually. While 147 spe cies of mamm als (including
orangutan, tiger, rhino ceros, an d elephant ), 114 bird s, 28 reptile s, 91
fishe s and 28 inve rteb rate s h ad become extinct in the process. (WRI et
all. (2002) - State of the Fo re st Indone sia; WRI e t all. (2000 ) - Trial by
Fire; FA O - Global Fo rest Re sou rce s Assessment 2005)
The exten sive defore station also redu ced of biodiversit y richne ss in
Indone sia. There a re 3 m ain centre s of specie s richne ss in Indone sia,
which are Irian Jaya (with high spe cies richne ss and endemism ),
Kalimantan (with high sp ecie s richness but m oderate endem ism ), and
Sulawe si (with m oderate specie s richness and high endem ism ). So
Indone sia’s biodiversity was affected trem endou sly by unsu stainable
land developm ent (WRI et all., 2002 - State of t he Fore st Indo nesia; W RI
et all., 2000 - Trial by Fire).
I sland, Indonesia
Figure 8 Natural Forest Cov er Change in Indonesia, 1985 – 1997.

(Sources: WRI et all., 200 2 - St ate of the Fores t In do nesia)
Figure 9 Forest Cov er and 1997-1998 Forest Fires in Western Indonesia.

(Sources: WRI et all., 200 0 - Trial b y Fire, Forest)
Tabel 1 Forest Area and Def orestation, 1985 – 1997 (Governm ent of
Indonesia and W orld Bank Estim ates). (So urces: WRI et all., 2 002 - St ate of the
Forest Indo nesi a)
Figure 10 Biotic Ric hness: Percent of World’s Species Found in

Indonesia. (So urces: WRI et all., 2 002 - St ate of th e Forest Indo nesia)
It can be con cluded, that major problem s such a s re source depletion,

great population, high population den sity and poverty a re very often
faced b y de veloping count rie s. Beca u se of that sustainable developm ent
approa ch become s ve ry crucial. And it ha s to be implem ented starting
with the adoption of su stainable spatial planning practice.
On the cont ra ry, the im plementation of sustainable spatial planning

faced a lot of obst acles in developing countrie s. Lack of political wills,
Applying Integra ted Ecological Planning and Adaptive 11
I sland, Indonesia
limited government budget, lim ited tim eframe for p roject e xecution,
corruption and po verty we re the major hindrances. On the ot her hand,
sustainable spatial planning and development co ntrol i s the only solution
for su stainable developm ent. One su cce ssful practice i s Singapore.
(Wong T-C. et all, 2008).
The Singapore planning was done with m eticulous effo rt of the

Government and achieving Singapo re ’s model of su stainability (Wo ng T-
C. et all, 2008). Enhan cing the city condition, the government furt her
prepared seve ral su stainable st rategie s such as Singapore’s Green
Plan, and Singapo re’s Su stainable De velopm ent Blueprint. 3
Figure 11 The Singapore Sust ainable City Model. (So urce: Wo ng T-C. et all,
2008, redra wn b y Ta nuwidj aja G.).
Hi storically, the sust ainable spatial planning wa s invented in b y Ian

McHarg. He invent ed Ecological Planning, which defined a s,
“Comprehensi ve land use planning which co n sider the so cial, legal,
3
http://app.m ewr.gov.sg/web/C ontents/C ontents.aspx?C ontId=1342
http://app.mewr.gov.sg/data/Im gCont/1292/sustainbleblueprint_forweb.pdf
econom y, the need, aspiration and perception of the futu re use r,”
(McHa rg, 1 992; M cHarg, 1998 ).
Ba sed on the pre vious wo rks, we de veloped the “Integ rate d Spatial
Planning with Focu s on E cological Approach”, which could be defined as
“Planning process which con side r the ecological condition (biodiversit y),
environmental capacity, a nd social -econom ic conte xt that influence the
site. Fu rther, in the planning process, integration of infrast ruct ure
planning such as water resource m anagem ent, etc m ust be evaluated
and im plemented. Lastly, but not least the sta keholders’ pa rticipation
must be facilitated in all decision making pro cess.” And this co ncept
could be de scribed in the following figure.
Figure 12 The Integrated Spatial Planning with Ecological Approach.
And the re a re the critical point s in the app roach, which a re:
Condu cting m ultidisciplinary landscape e valuation to determine the

con servation area and mitigate m ajor environmental im pact to the site.
Con serving of critical ecological area that are important for ecology and
other en vironm ental se rvices
I sland, Indonesia
Evaluating of local natural re sou rce s, such a s wate r reso urce s,

infra st ructu re p rovi sion s etc.
La stly but not lea st, det ermining the ca rrying capacity of p otential area
for development.
Therefo re, a simple land scape evaluation tool i s need ed to suppo rt the
concep t above which suitable fo r de veloping count ries. The tool m ust be
sim ple enough for the users without com promising its validity. Further, it
should pre scribe the su stainable recomm endation and cater sta ke-
holders pa rticipation.
1.1 Des cription

This re search was conducted to develop integrated landscape
evaluation m ethod for planners and gove rnm ent autho rities of
developing count ries. Meanwhile, to validate the tool’s applicability, the
authors cho se the ca se in Bintan Island, Indone sia. It was unde rta ken to
understand it s limitations and fu rthe r refinement. And it was cond ucted
following these ste ps:
To develop integrated method of land scape evaluation, the autho rs t ried

to identify the key elements of se veral pa st evaluation method s. And we
evaluated their st rength, wea kne sse s and po ssible a rea for development
with the current te chnology.
These previou s re sea rch es in land scape evaluation o r site e valuation

are:
1. Approa che s fo r Gene ral A rea s : McHarg (1 992); A nderson (2000);

Aylward (2000 )
2. Approa che s fo r Rural and Natural Area s: Covent ry-Solihull-Warwick
(1971); A.O.N.B. (Penning – Ro swell, 1975); Blacksell and Gild
(1975); Rat cliffe (1977 ); Li, Wang, Liang & Zhou (2 006)
3. Approa che s fo r Urban A rea s: Wei ss, Donn elly and Kai se r (1966);
White (1985); Freem an (1999); Briffet (2001 ); Balm ori & Benoit
(2003)
Di stilling the relevant methods and crite ria, the authors p rescribed the
landscape evaluation tools nam ed ALiT, the a cron ym for Adaptive
Landscape E valuation Tool. “Alit” in Sund ane se language (native
language of West Java, Indone sia) means “sm all or simple”. This was
parallel to our intention to deliver a sim ple evaluation m ethod for

developing count ries.
We fu rther re fined and validated the m ethods du ring application. And

later we also integrate d input s from st akeholders in Bintan and
experience s with Singapore’s Urban Planning Consultant in various
developing count ries. 4
1.1.1 Landscape Evaluation Method

Broadly, the re are eight stage s of ALiT (Ad aptive Land scape E valuation
Tool), which a re:
1. Defining the Pu rpo se, Scope & Context of the E valuation

2. Criteria Selection
3. Secondary Data Collection
4. GIS Databa se Pro cessing
5. Rapid Su rve y of Critical Areas (Reconnai ssance S urvey
especially for Biological Aspe ct)
6. Expert Con sultation (Sem i-Delphi Consultation)
7. GIS Analysi s (including Ecological Factors, Othe r Natu ral
Fact ors and S ocio - Economic Facto rs)
8. Sta keholde rs Evaluation (Sta keholders Participation)
4
http://www.jurong.com/; Gunawan has practiced as Urban Planner with Jurong
Consultant Pte Ltd , Planning D ivision f or 2 years
I sland, Indonesia
D EFINING
P URPOSE . SCOPE ,
CON TEXT
CRITERIA
SELECTIO N
SECOND ARY
D ATA GIS DA TABASE RAP ID SU RVEY
CO LLECTION
EXP ERT
CO N SULTA TION
(SEMI-D ELPHI)
OTH ER NA TURAL ECOLOGICAL SO CIA L & ECON O MIC

FACTORS AN ALY SIS FA CTO RS AN ALY SIS FA CTO RS A NALYSIS
(GIS , QUA NTITATIV) (G IS, Q UA NTITATIV ) (GIS )
E E
CO N SERVA TION EXP EN SIVE D EVELOP MEN T MO ST SU ITA BLE

A REA A REA FOR W ITH SPECIAL FO R
D EVELOP MEN T TREATMEN T DEVELOPMENT
STA KEH OLDERS

EVALU ATIO
(FO
N CU S GRO UP
D ISCU SSION)
- RECO MMEN DATION O F LA ND

- CON
U SESSERVATION P LA N
- D EVELOP MENT PLAN
Figure 13 ALiT’s (Adaptiv e Landscape Ev aluation Tool) Methodology .

And we would describe the m ethodology of ALiT in detail below.
1.1.1.1 Defining the Purpose, Scope & Context of t he

Evaluation
Dete rm ining the purpo se and t he scope of evaluation is a crucial step for
ALiT application. Because it would help dete rmining the suitable m ethod,
reso urce allocation as well a s evaluation tim e frame.
We sugge st compulso ry purp o se, which are:
- evaluating and protecting area fo r con se rvation

- predicting and reducing environmental impact s from adjacent and
future development
Two additional alternative pu rposes a re suggested, such a s:
- determ ining the suitability of certain development to ce rtain location

- selecting the mo st suitable location for ce rtain development (site
selection)
Originally, we adopted the possible land u se of ALiT from Anderson

(2000), McHa rg (1992) and Singapo re’s Enviro nmental Pollution Control
Act (Code of Practice s on Pollution Control, 2000). But con sequently, we
sim plified them into categorie s of re sid ential, indust rial and comm ercial
& institutional faciliti es for simpler application. While other spatial uses
we re still under tho rough and further research.
1.1.1.2 Criteria Selection & Secondary Data Collection

Originally, sixteen general criteria we re selected to repre sent the
environmental functions and socio-e conomic consideration s. The se
criteria we re adapted f rom previous work of McHarg (1992,1998), White
(1985), Rat cliffe (1977), Ande rson (2000 ), Balm ori and Benoit (2003).
These criteria were later divided into three grou ps rep re senting
ecological facto rs, othe r natu ral facto rs and socio-e conomic fa ctors. The
strat egy wa s conducted to redu ce the po ssible bias of the e valuation
result. This strategy was adopted b y Freem an (1999 ) but with simpler
criteria.
Group 1 Data Set wa s p repa red to measu re the e cological value and
con serve natural area s. The ecological value is m ainly repre sented by
eco system type which i s not sim ilar in every location. Othe r factors if
I sland, Indonesia
available such a s patch size, rarity of plant and animal specie s,

ecological connectivity and water bodies’ buffer would reinforce the
accu rate re sult s.
Group 2A Dat a Set wa s prepared t o mea sure the suitability for

development relating to construction an d cataclysm co st s. Tho se criteria
are the exi sting land use, topog raph y (especially slope), geolog y, soil
type s, hydrolog y, clim ate, and re sou rce s. They are al so con side red as
important crite ria because of con sid eration of hazardo us p otential such
as flooding, hurricane, typhoon, land slide, erosion, et c.
Later on, Group 2B wa s added to the criteria. This group include criteria
related to physi cal facto rs, such a s accessibility and existing
infra st ructu re, which require major inve stm ent s if needed. The authors
realise that additional parameter can be included, fo r exam ple access to
rail, port s airp ort s an d logistic wa rehou ses for indu strial area suitability
for othe r application, such as new indust rial area.
Following on, Group 3 Data Set wa s p repa red to measu re social and
econom ic a spe ct s. The y a re political-legal factors, eco nom ic factors, and
social factors. Som e of the factors ca n record social-economic condition
such a s high crim e rate, or are endemic for ce rtain disea se s, etc. that
needed by t he policy m ake rs.
Finally, the human senso ry a spect, com pri sing vi sual quality and ot her
pollution were included in Group 3. These criteria are useful in finding
locations for tou ri sm areas, ho tel s, reso rts or high-end residential
developments that require be tter visual quality.
Ideally, we believe tha t all data de scribed ab ove should be collected. But
learning that only limited data are often available in developing cou ntries
context , we sugge sted the e valuators collecting critical data, such a s:
ecological, topographical, geology, soil type s, hyd rology and ot her
potential natural cata st rophe s. These data m ust be available whet her as
second ary data o r the rapid primary a sse ssm ent re sult. Ad ditionally,
further detailed studies are still needed to p roduce m ore accurate
analysi s.
1.1.1.3 GIS Dat abase Processing

After data collection, the data ha ve to be proce ssed dire ctly. We su gge st
the evaluators to recon sider the p rocessing method based on the
purpose; availability of skill set s, tool s or soft wa re a nd time.
We believe th at GIS (Geographic Inform ation Syst em ) software should

be u sed to produce m ore accurate dat a. On the other hand considering
the lim itation in developing countries, we p rovided t wo m ajor m ethods
for ALiT su ch a s: GIS databa se and manual databa se.
Under the GIS flo w, there are several alternative steps identified:
a. Selecting and using GIS Soft wa re (such a s Arc View GI S 3.1) for
databa se m anagement and analysi s
b. Purcha sing a ba seline vector map from rem ote se n sing service
provide rs
c. If the vector map unavailable, other topog raphical m ap could be
digitised with GIS soft ware (Autocad, Mapinfo etc)
d. Digitising othe r factors into GI S data set (grid or shapefiles)
e. Continuing to analysi s pha se
Under the manual flow, we find that M cHa rg’s t ransp arent laye r m ap
could be u sed to produce con servation and developm ent suitability
maps (McHarg, 1998 ). We also note improvement of thi s m ethod with
assi stan ce of t he late st computer g raphic soft ware application (su ch as
Photoshop and Power point).
1.1.1.4 Rapid Survey

Con side ring budget a nd time con straint s, the rapid su rvey is sugg ested
to be fo cu sed in the critical area s. These areas could be area s with high
biodiversity & high scenic values; and a rea s to be developed in the n ear
future. And the se location s a re better to be identified first f rom aerial
image or se conda ry data (GI S or land u se m ap).
Fu rther, other im portant po ssible acce ss or mode of tran sport al so

should be surveyed. The se a rea s a re port s, m ajor roads (according to
the road s classifications), railways, light rails, airpo rts, as well as major
com mercial – institutional facilities.
I sland, Indonesia
Other poten tial hazard s al so mu st be identified, su ch a s: wetland s, flood

prone areas, slope s with potential landslide, polluting indu strie s,
hazardous material sto rage, etc. This inform ation is im portant especially
for residential and com mercial – institutional facilities.
Ha ving tried seve ral survey m ethod s in A LiT application, we re com mend
com bination of McHa rg t ransparent m ap s (M cHa rg, 1992), pho tograph s,
video documentation, GP S set, a nd survey tables. These method s are
found to be effe ctive, well-do cum ented and shorter in time wise.
1.1.1.5 Expert Consult ation ( Semi Delphi)

Interpretation of the seconda ry data should be co nduct ed involving a
team of expert s. A team, com prising of a Planner, Land scape Ecologist,
Con servationi st, Hyd rologist, Civil Engineer, Geologist, and Socio-
Econom ic Scienti st, should be recruited.
Later on, all data need to be interpreted and t ranslated into ranking
criteria following the sustainable principals by the team. The principals
we re al ready p re scribed in the previou s work o f M cHarg (1992), White
(1985), Ratcliffe (1977 ), Ande rson (200 0), Balmori and Benoit (2003).
And sample of ran king criteria is pre sented in the following table.
Tabel 2 Sample of Ranking Criteria f or ALiT
No Criteria H ighest C onservation Most Suitable for

Value Development
Group 1
A Vegetation
A1 Ecosystem Type Highest C onserv ation Lowest Conserv ation

Value Value
A2 Patch Size More than 10 ha Less than 0.4 ha
A3 R arity of Plant Species Threatened and N o Species Found
Endangered Species
A4 Ecological C onnectiv ity Good Fragm ented
R iparian & Beaches
A5 Less than 15 m More than 165 m
Buffer
B Animal
Threatened and
B1 R arity of Animal Species N o Species Found
Endangered Species
This approach wa s originally pre scribed by M cHa rg (1998). Late r, we

adopted differe nt app roach of sco ring method similar to Freem an (1999).
La stly, we redefine the scoring interp retation validity with more
assi stan ce of Sem i-Delphi discu ssio n.
Adopting Environmental Im pact Asse ssm ent, we differentiate the

important criteria with m ajor environmental im pact from other norm al
criteria (Morri s and Therivel, 1995). Thi s concept i s t ran slated into t wo
type s of scoring scale s. The first scale (0 t o 30) i s dedica ted for criteria
with m ajor im pact (major-weighting). The se cond scale (0 t o 3) is
pre scribed for the one s with m inor im pact (m inor-weighting).
Figure 14 Cons erv ation and Dev elopment Suitability Scale in ALiT.
We also produce new app roach in scoring technique, which de scribed 0

or zero re pre senting the high conse rvation areas or tot ally unsuitable
area fo r development. On the cont rary we p re scribed 30 or 3
rep resenting the m ost suitable area for developm ent.
Tabel 3 Criteria Int erpret ation f or ALiT
C riteria Interpretation
Major Minor
No D evelopment
C onservation W eighting W eighting
Suitability
1 H igh C onservation N ot Suitable for 0–9 0
Value D ev elopm ent
2 Medium Conservation Expensiv e for 10 -19 1
Value D ev elopm ent
I sland, Indonesia
3 Low C onservation Suitable f or 20 – 29 2

Value, Partial Hum an D ev elopment with
Intervention Special Treatm ent
4 N o C onservation Value, Most Suitable f or 30 3
Massiv e H uman D ev elopm ent
Intervention
Tabel 4 Sample ALiT Scoring f or Bintan Ecological Dat a

(Legend: Italic text showed Indonesian translation)
No C ategory (K ategori) C riteria Score

(Nilai Kriteria)
A Vegetation (Flora)
A1 Ecosystem Type (Tipe Ekosistem)
W hich specific to Bintan (Spesifik untuk Bintan)
Bare Earth (Tanah Terbuka) 30
Mining (Pertambangan) 30
H um an Settlem ent (Permukiman) 25
Agriculture (Pertanian) 20
Scrub (Padang) 20
Marsh (Rawa) 15
Plantation (Kebun) 15
Abandoned Plantation (Kebun yang Ditinggalkan) 12
Secondary Forest (Hutan Sekunder) 10
Mangrov e 5
C oral Reef (Terumbu Karang) 0
Fresh Water Swam p Forest (Hutan Rawa Air Taw ar) 0
Prim ary Forest (Hutan Primer) 0
A2 Patch Size (Luas Ekosistem)
0-0.4 ha 2
0.4 -1 ha 1
1 -10 ha 0
> 10 ha 0
I sland, Indonesia
Tabel 5 Sample ALiT Scoring f or Bintan Ecological Dat a continued

Legend: Italic text showed Indonesian translation
No C ategory (K ategori) C riteria Score

(Nilai Kriteria)
A3 R arity of Plant Species (K elangkaan Flora)

N o D ata (Tidak ada Data) 2
C omm on Species (Spesies Biasa) 2
Endemic Species to Large Area (Spesies Endemik pada 2
Daerah yang Luas)
Endemic Species to Sm all Area (Spesies Endemik pada 1
Daerah yang Sempit)
Threatened and Endangered Species (Spesies Langka 0
dan Terancam Langka)
A4 Ecological C onnectivity (Konektivitas Ekologi)
Good (Baik) 0
Fragm ented (Tidak baik) 2
A5 R iparian & B eaches Buffer (Buffer untuk Sungai,
D anau, R awa dan Pantai)
0 - 15 m 0
15 - 50 m 0
50 - 165 m 1
> 165 m 2
B Animal (Fauna)
B1 R arity of Animal Species (Kelangkaan Fauna)
N o D ata (Tidak ada Data) 2
C omm on Species (Spesies Biasa) 2
Daerah yang Luas)
Daerah yang Sempit)
Threatened and Endangered Species (Spesies Langka 0
dan Terancam Langka)
We decide to bring Bintan ’s case to explain the rationale of selecting 0

sco re for the high con servation area s. Further, to mea su re a total
con servation score o r de velopment suitability for one a rea, all the critical
criteria or facto rs of the location should be calculated f ollowing the se
calculations.
Tabel 6 Score C alculation f or ALiT
Cons erv ation suit ability score = f actor A score * f actor B sc ore, etc
(Group 1 sc ore)
Dev elopment suit ability score = f actor C sc ore * factor D score * f actor E
(Group 2 or 3 sc ore) score, etc
So for e xample, if the area is a prim ary fore st in Bintan; with patch size
of 0.4 ha; po sse sses certain endem ic spe cie s of plant s t o small; not
connected with e cological corridor (f ragm ented); located at 1 65 m
distance f rom the b each; and po sse sse s one endemic species of
animals to large area. The individual factor score would follow this t able.
Tabel 7 Sample of Score Calculation f or ALiT f or Ecological Score
C riteria Score
No C ategory (K ategori)
(Nilai Kriteria)
A Vegetation (Flora)
A1 Ecosystem Type (Tipe Ekosistem)
Prim ary Forest (Hutan Primer) 0
A2 Patch Size (Luas Ekosistem)
0-0.4 ha 2
A3 R arity of Plant Species (Kelangkaan Flora)
D aerah y ang Sem pit)
A4 Ecological Connectivity (Konektiv itas Ekologi)
Fragm ented (Tidak baik) 2
A5 R iparian & Beaches Buffer (Buffer untuk Sungai, D anau,
R awa dan Pantai)
50 - 165 m 1
B Anim al (Fauna)
B1 R arity of Anim al Species (Kelangkaan Fauna)
D aerah y ang Luas)
I sland, Indonesia
The con se rvation score of the area would be able to calculated as follow
Con servation = A1 * A2 * A3 * A4 * A5 * B1
sco re (Group score sco re sco re score sco re score
1 score )
=0 *2 *1 *2 *1 *2
=0
So, it can be con cluded that the primary f orest pat ch i s not suitable for
any developm ent. Further, similar principal also would be able to be
applied in development suitability. Flood prone a rea s, high potential
area s for land slide and earthquake are not suitable for development
acco rding to ALiT.
1.1.1.6 GIS Analysis

GIS an alysi s i s sta rted with co nve rsion of attributes abo ve into sco res by
databa se soft ware o r GIS scripting. Later on all GIS data should be
com piled and calculated in three g roup s. Sim ilar cla ssification of data
set s, we al so p ropose d categori sing sco ring into 3, which are Group 1
sco re for the ecological value; group 2 score fo r suitability in other
natural asp ect and gro up 3 score fo r suitability in so cio–econom ic
aspect.
The conse rvation thre shold need s to b e rede fined again in the expert
panel. The threshold is not fixed, but from conve ntion s of the expe rt s,
producing balance con se rvation and de velopment recomm endation.
Fo r example, the threshold in Bintan was adju sted to 47%. It was

selected in the view o f con serving important a rea and re comm ending
less e cological im portant area for development, such a s scrubland,
agriculture, m ining, barren ea rth. For compari so n, Freem an (19 99)
recomm ended score 14 of total 3 0 for con servation th resh old in Leeds
case o r 46%. After setting the th re shold, we could find area s with low
ecological sco re which could be suitable for development.
Potential suitable area s fo r developm ent need to be e valuated for ot her

factor suitability. And thre sholds would need to be set fo r each score
(score 2 and score 3 ). Finally the analysi s would produce 3
recomm endation of area, su ch a s: very suitable area for development,
suitable area with certain treatment, area that expensive to de velop and
area not suitable for th e developm ent.
Tabel 8 Sample of Threshold of Cons ervation and Dev elopment

Suit ability
No Criteria Interpretation Criteria Score
Group 1 Score (C onservation) for Bintan C ase

1 Proposed f or conservation 0 - 47%
2 R ecomm ended for developm ent, need further Group 2 and 3 47.1 - 100%
assessm ent
Group 2 and Group 3 Scores (Development Suitability)
1 N ot Suitable for D evelopment 0 – 33.3%
2 Expensiv e for Developm ent 33.3 – 66.6%
3 Suitable f or D evelopm ent with Special Treatm ent 66.6 – 99.9%
4 Most Suitable f or D evelopm ent 100%
Fu rther, su stainable planning and de sign concept mu st be prepared for

area t hat a re e xpensi ve for development and suitable but need certain
treatment. For example, barre n land in Bintan could be de veloped, but
with the caref ul soil erosion p revention. Another example, proper
stru ctu ral system with adaptation to the ea rthquake i s needed for
development in the earthqua ke p rone areas.
1.1.1.7 St akeholder Evaluation

Sta keholde r evaluation of the interim landscape evaluation result s is
needed. It wa s proposed to e nsu re the acceptan ce of the local
com munities, governm ent a s well a s p rivate sectors an d redu ce the
social impacts f rom the plan.
Participato ry approach wa s originally developed in UK and USA. This

process wa s later introduce d to the developing count rie s b y the n on-
government organi sation, such a s A DB, GTZ, USAI D and JICA, to po st-
disa ste r areas su ch a s Aceh (Nanggroe A ceh Daru ssalam Province,
I sland, Indonesia
Indone sia). Although still facing difficulty, these processes were

generally accepted in Indo ne sia and quite succe ssful. 5
The difficulties of implem enting participatory planning are the limitation

of project time (e specially government-funded and inte rnational-fund ed)
and po ssible conflict of intere st s. Fu rthe r, we al so found th at the fut ure
spatial development information could create land sp eculation in the
countrie s with liberal land m arket, such a s India, Indone sia, Vietnam,
etc.
But we still believe that the sta keholde rs’ participation still would bring
po sitive im pact s to th e com muniti es and sustainable spatial planning.
Finally, we would like emphasi se t hat afte r ALiT im plementation, an
Integrated Spatial Plan should be prepa red by prof essional consultant s.
Fu rther to validate ALiT applicability, we will describe its application in
Bintan I sland, Indone sia.
1.1.2 Applicat ion of ALiT (Adaptive Landscape Evaluation

Tool) in Bint an Buyu
ALiT was applied to re view the e cological condition a s well a s the
fea sibility of Bintan Buyu Developm ent, Bintan Island, Indone sia. The
area wa s o riginally designated by Bintan Regency Go ve rnment as the
new Di strict Cent re (nam ed as Banda r Se ri Bintan) in 2004. Facing
resi sta nce from Cent ral Gove rnm ent becau se of co nse rva tion status of
the area, the Local Governm ent conduct ed fea sibility re-evaluation with
our team a ssi stance.
Although the development wa s rejected by the Cent ral Government, we

are glad to participate becau se our ability to mitigate the impacts and to
produce su stainable spatial development scena rio. And we fo cuse d our
evaluation in m easuring the conservation value and re sidential suitability
of the location which described accordingly.
First, a gen eral survey and interviews for collecting secondary data were
conducted. The p roce ss involved Bintan Planning Agency (BA PPEDA);
5
http://www.relief web.int/library/docum ents/2005/brr-idn-22sep.pdf
http://www.adb.org/D ocum ents/Reports/39127-IN O/FactSheets/village-plans.pdf
http://www.scribd.com /doc/13103851/Participatory-Planning-in-Aceh-U RDIGTZ-Sem inar-
2526-July -2008
http://indonesia.usaid.gov/en/Article.361.aspx
http://www.jica.go.jp/indonesia/english/activities/pdf/JICAinAceh.pdf
Stati stics Agen cy (BP S); Fore st ry Age ncy (Dinas Kehutan an; Public
Works Agency (Dinas PU); and Inve stm ent Coordination and Regional
Promotion Board (BKP MD) of Bintan.
The m ost -updated critical GIS data set s we re collected from the Public
Works Department (199 3). Other maps we re al so collected f rom
Indone sian National Geological Re sea rch Cent re and National Water
Re sources Cen tre in Bandung, W est Ja va, Indone si a. And this allowed
the application of GIS soft wa re (Arc Vie w GIS 3 .1). The data late r were
scanne d, geo-referenced and co nve rted to shape-files (SHP ).
A comprehensi ve site su rvey wa s condu cted with team of four person s,

com pri sing 1 Urban Planner, 2 Biologists and 1 Civil Engineer
(Go vernment Officer), in June 200 6. It was exe cuted using ALiT’s
recomm ended tools. And we found it very effective and accurate
because of adequ ate experti se and tool s.
In the survey, some point s for biological assessment were selected

rep resenting each ecotype. Many important ecotype s had been
converted to agricultu re land or hum an set tlement based on 1993’s e co-
type s. Thi s finding actually highlighted the importance of latest remote
sen sing im age data in evaluation process. Unfo rtunately, be cau se of
funding lim itation, the data wa s not collected.
GIS databa se analysi s wa s late r condu cted focusing only on Ecological

sco re a nd Re side ntial De velopm ent Suitability for oth er natu ral factor
sco re. The an alysi s was co nduct ed involving of m ultidisciplinary team
con sisting of Principal Urban Planne r and Re searche r, Land scape
Ecologi st, Con se rvationist , Hyd rologist cum Drainage Enginee r, and
Civil Engineer cum Geologist. Du ring the analysi s p roce ss, we we re al so
assi sted by 2 Senior GIS e xpe rts f or GIS d atabase proce ssing and
analysi s f rom National Unive rsit y of Singapo re.
All data later were collected and processed following the criteria priority
and significance in the evaluation pro ce ss.
Tabel 9 Data Proc essed in Bintan Buyu Ev aluation.

(Legend : Y = Yes, N = No)
Consi-
Calcu-
Av aila- dered in lated in
No Criteria bility
the
ALi T
R eason
Gene-ral
Analysis Scoring
I sland, Indonesia
Consi-
Calcu-
dered in
Av aila- lated in
No Criteria bility the ALi T R eason
Gene-ral
Scoring
Analysis
Group 1
A Vegetation
A1 Ecosyste m T ype Y Y Y
A2 Patch Size N
A3 Rarity of Pl ant Sp ecies N
A4 Ecolog ical Connectivit y Y Y Y
A5 Riparian & Be ach es B uffer Y Y Y
B Animal
B1 Rarity of Animal Sp ecies Y Y Y Partial d ata a vailable

Consi-
dered in Calcu-
Av aila- lated in
No Criteria the R eason
bility ALi T
Gene-ral Scoring
Analysis
Group 2A
C Existing Land Use
C1 Comp atibilit y with Existing N
Lan d Use
C2 Existi ng Facility Ad eq uacy Y Y Y
D Topography
D1 Ele vatio n Y Y Y
D2 Slope Y Y Y
E Geology
E1 Foundati on Streng th Y Y Y
E2 Earthq ua ke and Volc anic Z one Y Y N Beca use similar fac tor
affec ting th e site
E3 Anticline, S ynclin e, an d Fa ult Y Y N
F Soils
F1 Foundati on Streng th Y Y Y
F2 Erosion by S oil Type Y Y Y
G Inland Hydrology
G1 Recharg e Are as Y Y Y
G2 Aq uifer Prod ucti vit y Y Y Y
G3 Surfac e Waters an d Flood Y Y Y
Zone
G4 Catch ments Are as Y Y Y
H Marine Hydrology
H1 Marine Fea tures N
I C limate
I1 Hurricane, T ypho on Y Y N Beca use almost si milar
factor aff ecting the site
I2 Ann ual Rai nfall Y Y N
I3 Rainy Days in 1 year, Y Y N
Damp ness, A ver ag e
Temp erature, Mo nthl y
Temp erature, Wind Pa ttern ,
Sun Ang le and Traject ory
J R esources
J1 Mining Resources Y N Beca use not e valuat ed
for Mining
I sland, Indonesia

Consi-
dered in Calcu-
Av aila- lated in
No Criteria the R eason
bility ALi T
Gene-ral Scoring
Analysis
Group 2B
N Location
N1 Distance from th e Main Roa d Y Y Y
N2 Averag e Dista nce from Oth er Y Y N Beca use similar fac tor
City within Area affec ting th e site
N3 Averag e Dista nce from Y Y N
Regional a nd Int erna tional
Centre
O C irculation
O1 Inland Trans port Y Y Y
O2 Wat er Transp ort Y Y Y
P U tilities
P1 Availability o f Utilities Facilit y Y Y Y
I sland, Indonesia
Tabel 12 Data Process ed in Bintan Buy u Evaluation.

Consi-
Calcu-
dered in
Av aila- lated in R eason
No Criteria bility
the
ALi T
Gene-ral
Analysis Scoring
Group 3
K Politics and Legal
Factors
K1 Municipal G o vern ment Y Y N Beca use similar fac tor
Economic an d Hu ma n affec ting th e site
Resources C apacit y
K2 Future Gover nment Pla n Y N Because the Master
Plan was ca ncelled
L Economic Factors
L1 Lan d Market Pricing N
L2 Lan d O wnership N
L3 Regional Gross D omestic Y Y N Beca use similar fac tor
Produc t Tren d affec ting th e site
M Social Factors
M1 Hig her Educa tion Level Y Y N Because dat a onl y
availabl e in ge neral and
similar factor affecting
the sit e
M2 Middle E duca tion Level Y Y N
M3 Criminalities L evel N
M4 Population Densit y Y Y N Because dat a onl y
availabl e in ge neral and
similar factor affecting
M5 Numb er of Pa tients a nd Y Y N
the sit e
Deaths b y Diarrho ea
M6 Numb er of Pa tients a nd Y Y N
Deaths b y De ng ue/Malaria
Q H uman Sensory
Q1 Visual Q ualit y N
Q2 Other Pollutio n N
Becau se we fo und that only limited num bers of da ta were available for
Bintan Bu yu, we decided to f ocu s the e valuation to a vailable data and
com pleting som e critical data with primary su rve y.
From the application, we also found that some data we re only available
in regional scale, not in the local scale. Therefo re, we decided including
the data in general evaluation, but not in cluding them in the total scoring
calculation. This was implem ented for simpler ALiT application. Further,
only the most si gnificant data we re di scu sse d in thi s paper.
The ecological condition of the Bintan Buyu wa s o riginally adopted from

1993’s Natural Re sou rce s Inventory (by Bintan Planning Agen cy, cited in
BKPMD 20 05) and validated by prim ary rapid biological assessment.
Bintan Buyu was hist orically occupied by the ag riculture comm unities in
1950’s. In 1991 by Pre sidential Decree No. 32 (Keputu san Pre siden No
32, 1991), the area wa s designated a s protecte d catchment s area, but it
wa s im plemented without land acqui sition and com munity participation.
This later cau sed the con servation plan fail, leaving agriculture activities
and creating rural - nat ural a rea patchwork (cited in Riau I slands
Planning Agency and CV Geometric Tehnik, 2005).
Figure 15 Ecosy stem Ty pe of Bintan Buy u. (Sources: Riau Isl ands Pla nning
Agenc y, 200 4; c orrected in th e Rapi d Biol ogical Assess ment, 2006)
I sland, Indonesia
Bintan Buyu’s ecological condition was com po sed of seve ral eco -t ype s.
First, t he highest ecological areas f ound we re co ral reef, m angrove,
prim ary fo re st , and fre sh wat er swam p fore st. We sugge sted t hese to be
con served because of im portant function s, such as ha bitat for plant and
animal, coa stline protection, wa ste assimilator, wate r purification, and
nursery ground fo r marine life and birds (Whitten et al., 2000).
Fu rther, area s with the second highe st ecological value were the
second ary fo re st s, m arshes and abandoned plantation s. They held
certain fun ctions o f habitat for biodiversit y but t hey we re still in the
reco ve ry proce ss afte r hum an inte rvention s. Fo r example, the team
found Banded Leaf M on keys in the a bandoned plantation s which could
be con side red a g ood habitat.
The third e cotype s, with the se cond lowe st ecological values, were
agricultural land and scrubland in the area. The se areas could be
con side red a s a man-m ade environm ent and po sse ssed low
biodiversity, which we re the dragonflies and bird s. Therefo re, the se
area s were po ssible for d evelopment. On the cont rary som e patches of
scrub should be prese rved fo r local species habitat.
Finally, the team found som e very low ecological value areas, which
we re could be developed, if the development was perm itted. They were
the mining or ex-m ining area s and b arren ea rth.
Meanwhile, two im portant endem ic species were also foun d in the area.
The Banded Kingfishe r (Lacedo pulchella) and Ba nded Lan gur
(Presb ytis sia men sis rhionis) are t wo examples of the endemic spe cie s.
Figure 16 Elevation of Bintan Buy u. (Source : Bin tan Reg ency Public Wor ks
Depart me nt, 19 93)
Figure 17 Slope of Bintan Buy u. (Source: Binta n Reg e nc y P ublic Wor ks

Depart me nt, 19 93)
I sland, Indonesia
Topographically, Bintan Buyu area was located on the altitude of 0 to

255 m from sea level. Bintan Mountain (Gunung Bintan) the highe st
point of the a rea and with 15-45 pe rcent slope. It held im portant
function s of wate r cat chm ent s and wildlife habitat. Therefore, thi s area
wa s not suitable for de velopm ent (Bintan Reg ency Public Works
Department, 1993 ).
Meanwhile, exten sive the lowland a rea s, with 0-1 pe rcent slope, were
identified in the location. These areas were often vege tated by
mangrove, fre sh wate r swam p fore st and m arshe s. And the y were not
definitely suitable for developm ent becau se of poo r soil st rength,
extreme land subsi dence, and very high cost of inf ra st ru ctures especially
for landfill and flood protection.
Figure 18 Geological Lay ers of Bint an Buy u. (Source: Kusna ma et .al., 1994)
Figure 19 Soil Ty pes of Bintan Buyu. (Source: A kus et.al., 199 4)
The Geological layer found in Bintan Bu yu a rea wa s Ande site, Goungon

Fo rmation, and Alluvium (Kusnama, et al., 1994). Areas with Ande site
layer were not suitable for de velopm ent due to the ro ck laye r ha rdne ss
and expen sive excavation cost. M ean while, area s with the Alluvium
layer were not suitable for developm ent due to poor strength and
po ssible soil ero sion. So, o nly areas with Goungon Formation were
found feasible for development.
Bintan Buyu, were cat egorised a s the Zone VI e arthquake ha zard. Or it

wa s consid ered safe f rom earth qua kes or t sunam is. An d no anticline,
syn cline, st rike slip fault, or normal fault were found affecting the area
(Ku snama, et al., 1994). And it means that the area possessed higher
development suitability, but the sco re wa s e xcluded from calculation
because similar attribute in the area.
Bintan Buyu’s soil wa s composed of 2 t ype s, which were Alluvium and

coa stal deposit, (con si sting of g ravel, sa nd, clay an d m ud deposit); and
Acid intrusive rocks - gra nite (Akus et al., 1994). The Alluvium soil was
I sland, Indonesia
found to be m ore vulnerable for e rosion and weake st for foundation

strength.
Figure 20 Catchm ents Area of Bintan Buy u. (Source: A kus et. al., 1994).
There were th ree main rivers in the a rea, of Bintan Rive r, Kangboi River,
and Anculai Rive r. 3 major cat chment s and 1 minor cat chm ent s were
also identified. In 1991, these cat chm ent s were de signa ted as prot ected
catchm ent s area, but appa rently thi s st rategy wa s not effectively
implem ented (Riau I sland s Planning Agency and CV Geometric Tehnik,
2005). And the plan wa s not com patible anymore becau se of th e present
of polluting activities, such as mining in Lom esa, Bintan Buyu. The
polluting developments we re also n ot com patible with residential
development.
Bintan’s economy depends heavily on industry, m ining, trade and

touri sm se ctors with tot al Regional Dome stic Product 1,053.84 Billion
Rupiah (B KPM D, 2005). So the developm ent of new district centre
should be adapted to the real econ om ic condition and environmental
capacity.
I sland, Indonesia
Tabel 13 Table 10. Bintan’s Regional Domestic Product in 2003 – 2004.

(Source: BPS, 2 004)
2003 2004 Annual

Increase
% to % to
No Sectors
Billion Regional Billion Regional
Rupiah Domestic Rupiah Domestic %
Product Product
1 Agriculture 54.11 5.65 61.68 5.85 13.14
2 Mining 259.28 27.08 290.48 27.56 11.51
3 Industry 383.17 40.02 412.81 39.17 6.94
4 Energy 1.78 0.19 2.08 0.20 17.48
5 Construction 43.71 4.57 49.83 4.73 13.78
Trade and
6 122.96 12.84 135.20 12.83 9.23
Tourism
Transportation
7 and 48.03 5.02 54.24 5.15 12.47
C ommunication
8 Finance 19.63 2.05 21.51 2.04 8.81
9 Serv ices 24.72 2.58 26.01 2.47 4.53
Total 957.39 1,053.84 9.24
The highest contributor to The lowest contributor to

Legend: R egional Dom estic Product R egional D om estic Product
We also noted the population of Bintan Buyu increa sed 0.88% annually.
In April 2006, local population wa s re cord ed rea ching 2,065 persons
(Teluk Bintan Di st rict Office, 2006). Most of local population worked in
agriculture and fi shers se ctors. On the ot her han d, no detailed local
social data was available cau sing e valuation difficulty. It can be
concluded that the Bintan Bu yu comm unity depended heavily in
agriculture and fi sherie s. Meanwhile, if the location wa s developed, new
econom ic activitie s m ust be int roduced with investments to suppo rt the
new di st rict centre.
Figure 21 Bintan’s R oad Net work. (So urce: Bint an R egenc y Public Wor ks Ag e ncy
and Riau Isl an ds Pla nni ng Ag ency, 2004)
Bintan Buyu wa s locat ed cent rally in the island but poorly connected (by
dual-lane a sphalt road ) with oth er a rea in 2006. In the futu re, a coa stal
ring road along would be const ructed co nnecting the area.
Unfo rtunately, the road wa s not planned con sidering the ecological
condition and affe cted the important forest s in the a rea (Riau I slands
Planning Agency, 2004). Further, Bintan Bu yu was not served by pro per
public tran spo rtation and infra stru ctu res. The se eventually would require
heavy inve stm ent s if the city was de veloped.
Other description of the area, such as Inland Hyd rology, atmospheric

condition, potential re sources, Lo cation, Circulation, Utilities, Politics and
Legal Fact ors, Economic Fa ctors, Social Fa cto rs, Hum an Se n so ry, etc;
we re de scribed in our com plete re sea rch report (Tanuwidjaja G., 2006 ).
1.1.3 Discussion
The re search concluded that Bintan Buyu wa s a fragmented natural area
with some important biological area s. The rem aining ecological areas
needed a serious con servation and enhancement st rategy. Further, this
I sland, Indonesia
strat egy could be com bined with sustainable eco -touri sm. This ha d been
implem ented successfully by B anyan Tree Re sort s and Hotels in
northe rn a rea of Bintan I sland.
We al so recomm ended pre serving an d improving seve ral areas of

scrubland, fore st, riparian area to im prove ecological connectivity of the
area. Seve ral area s in the North ern of Bintan Buyu were recomm ended
for development due to low e cological value s.
Figure 22 Bintan Buy u’s Group 1 Sc ore (C ons erv ation Sc ore).
Figure 23 Bintan Buy u’s Cons erv ation Area.
The evaluation of other natural factors wa s f urthe r re comm ended for

po ssible area s of development in the Nort h. However, critical threat s,
such a s landslide pot ential, flooding potential and land sub side nce, m ust
receive p rope r attention. Finally, the spatial plan m ust be prepa red
carefully with integration with othe r infra structure s.
I sland, Indonesia
Figure 24 Bintan Buy u’s Group 2 (Other Nat ural Fact ors) Score for
Residential.
Figure 25 Bintan Buy u’s Group 2 Suitable Area f or Residential.

To be able to a chieve a su stainable township in Bintan Buyu, it is
important to set the population according sustainable principal. There
we re t wo po ssible recomm endations identified.
The first m ethod was sugge sted by McHarg’s with lim iting developm ent
to le ss ecological important area s (M cHa rg 1998 ). The scrub, agriculture
and some of plantation areas, ap pro xim ately 10.5 sq km in the northern
of Bintan Buyu, we re suggested for development. Later with multiplying
the area with sust ainable population density, we could produce
population num ber.
McHarg recom mended another wa y to su stainable population setting.

He sugge sted limiting the city population following the city ecological
carrying capacity. This wa s p rescribed for Wilmington and Dover,
con side ring se wage di spo sal capacity, ground wate r supply and
rese rvoir wate r supply. Re spe ctively, he sugge sted a population of
33,100 people for the resp ective city (McHa rg 1998 ).
First, we de cided to follow the se cond re com mendation using local rain-
wate r sup ply capa city. With calculating the lowe st m onthly rainfall in
Bintan, area of Bintan River catchment s, runoff coefficient, we could
produce m inim um am ount of possible available rain-wat er. Assuming
30% of the flow was utilised by the municipal water supply, we could
pre scribe sustainable to wnship’s population of Banda r Seri Bintan of
57,000 pe rson s.
But combining both m ethods, the aut hors recom mended 57,000
populations (19,000 hou sing unit s) to be settled in the less ecological
important area s in the Northern area of Bintan Buyu. Further assum ing
only 50% of the areas were designated as resid ential, the average
residential den sity could reach 109 person s/ ha, with a low to m edium
rise de velopment.
Later, p roposed developm ent type could be elaborated following mixed-

used neighbourhood unit concept with 400 - 600 m radius adapt ed from
Perry’s Neighbourh ood (Urb an Planning Guide, 1986). Thi s option was
recomm ended becau se of limited economic capacity of the developing
countrie s. Fu rthe r public utilities and integrated wa ste managem ent
should be p rovided fo r the area.
I sland, Indonesia
Figure 26 Propos ed Fiction Scenario of Dev elopm ent of Bandar Seri

Bint an.
La stly, sta keholde rs’ evaluation wa s conducted in 2006. It involved of

Bintan Planning Agency and p rivate se ctor, Banyan Tree Reso rts
Bintan. The positive a s well as negative re sponse wa s re ceived. First,
the po sitive re sponse came from the private secto r who agreed to
support the re com mendation and help disseminate this concept to the
local Gove rnm ent.
On the othe r hand, the Bintan Government di sagreed with our

recomm endation and pursued other development or original alternative.
But con sequently, the Central Go vernment cancelled the de velopm ent of
Bandar Se ri Bintan becau se of th e cat chments con servation regulation.
1.1.4 Evaluation of ALiT approach.

ALiT implementation in Bintan was considered successful. The
evaluation method wa s found feasible by Office r of Bintan Planning
Agency, becau se of simple ALiT application and improving capacity of
local planning agency.
On the other hand, seve ral obst acle s were found in implem enting the
process, including expen si ve GI S so ft ware and rem ote sen sing data. For
example, Arc Vie w GIS 3. 1 soft wa re would cost around US$ 7,500,
while SPOT (rem ote sen sing ) images wo uld cost US$ 3,000. The se
we re the m ain challenges for its application.
The im portant factor of land sca pe evaluation is evaluato r. The authors

suggest including a team com prising at least of a civil engineer, planner
and ecologi st for compreh en sive application. It i s sugge sted to pre scribe
an ecologically balanced recomm endation. The team m ust wo rk
integrally and each of the expert s m ust po sse ss skill set . The skill set
needed are compre hension the lo cal ecology; knowledge of exi sting land
use and it s potential, geological condition, soil type s and hyd rology
regimes; u nderstanding of social and econom ic potentials and ot her
con straint s in the location.
The authors believed the importance of screening p roce ss for hazardous

potential. The rationale is to reduce t he environmental destru ction s and
cost s f rom natural di sa ste rs. The ca ses of the hurricane in Ne w Orlean s,
t sunam i and earthqua ke in A ceh signify this need.
1.2 Conclusion
Landscape evaluation proce ss i s an im portant step to t he su stainable
land developm ent. The evaluation of the previous method s re vealed the
importance of selecting the e valuation criteria, pro per weighting, rapid
survey, m ulti-disciplinary and stakeholde rs app roach in solving the
problem .
ALiT (Adaptive Land scape Evaluation Tool) ha s been made specifically

for such context s. The tool’s st rengths could be found at five
distingui shing stages. The first i s the criteria (f acto rs) selection. Thi s is
important to achieve effective comprehensi ve evaluation. The second is
the expert con sultation for setting sco res and weight s fo r the fa cto rs.
This st ep actu ally validates the biase s from subjective analysi s.
The third is rapid survey to complete the absen t of data, with

multidisciplinary team . The fourth i s the st akeholders’ e valuation. The
authors believed that participation of the people, p ublic and p rivate
sectors would guaran tee better realisation of the development. Lastly,
I sland, Indonesia
the method also red uce s result bias by using t hre e data set s for
evaluation, which are ecological, natu ral and so cio-econom ic facto rs.
1.3 Reference
1.3.1 Books
a. “A strat egy f or the sub-region”, Coventry-Solihull-W arwickshire Sub-
Regional Planning Study Group, Suppl. R ep. No. 5 Countryside (1971).
b. Akus U.T., Sunary a Y., Setiadi H., and Sukris na (1994), Hy dro-geological
Map and Report, Tanjung Pinang, 1016, 1017, Scale 1: 250.000, Geological
Researc h and D evelopm ent Centre.
c. Anderson L. T. (2000), Planning the Built Env ironment, Planner Press,
Chic ago, USA.
d. Ay lward B. (August 2000), Land Use, Hy drologic al Function and Ec onomic
Valuation, UNESCO Sy mposium/ Workshop Forest-W ater-People in the
Humid Tropics, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, edited by Bonell M. and Bruijnzel
L.A., publis hed by Cambridge U niversity Press.
e. Balmori D. and Benoit G. (eds.) (2003), The LAND Code: Guidelines f or
Env ironment ally Sustainable Land Dev elopment, Yale School of Forestry
and Env ironmental Studies, USA.
f . Bint an R egency Public W orks Department, 1993, GIS Map
g. BKPMD Kab. Kepulauan Riau (Riau Islands Regency Inv estment
Coordination and Regional Promotion Board). (2005), Potential Inv estment
Researc h Report (Pengk ajian Peluang Investasi Potensi/ Unggulan D aerah)
h. Blacksell M. and Gilg A.W. (Nov 1975), “Landsc ape Evaluation in Practic e –
the Cas e of South-East Dev on”, Trans actions of Institute of British
Geographers, number 66.
i. BPS Kab. Kepulauan Riau (Statistic Bureau Riau Island) (2004), Riau
Islands Statistics, 2004
j. Brif f et C. (2001), “Is Managed R ecreational Us e Compatible with Eff ective
Habitat and Wildlif e Occurrence in Urban Open Space Corridor Sy stems?”
in Landscape R esearch 26 (2) pp. 137-163.
k. Code of Practice on Pollution C ontrol (2000 Edition) (wit h amendments in
Feb 2001, Jun 2002 and Feb 2004).
l. Conley , D. (2008), You may ask y ourself: An introduction to thinking like a
sociologist, W.W . Norton and Company . New York p392
m. Economic and Social C ommiss ion f or Asia & the Pacif ic (2004), "Off icial
Statistics and its Development in Indonesia", Sub Committee on St atistics:
First Session 18–20 February 2004. p19.
n. Ellis, E.C. and N. Ramankutty (2008), Putting People in the Map:
Ant hropogenic Biom es of the World.
o. Freeman C. (1999), “Dev elopment of A Sim ple Method f or Site Surv ey and
Assess ment in Urban Areas”, Landsc ape and U rban Planning: 44, pp. 1-11.
p. International Monetary Fund (2007), R eport f or Selected Countries and
Subjects (GD P), World Economic Outlook D atabase, April 2007..
q. Kaly U.L, Pratt C.R..& Mitchell J. (2004), Manual: How to Use t he

Env ironment al Vulnerability Index (EVI). SOPAC Tec hnic al R eport 383.
r. Kaly U.L., Pratt C. & Mitchell, J. (2005), The Env ironmental Vulnerability
Index (EVI) 2004. SOPAC Technical Report 384.
s. Kus nama, K. Sutisna, T.C. Amin, S. Koes oemadinata, Sukardi, B.
Hermanto (1994), Systematic Geological Map, Indonesia Sheet Tanjung
Pinang, 1016, 1017, Sc ale 1: 250.000, Geologic al Res earch and
Dev elopment Centre, Bandung Indones ia.
t. Li A., Wang A., Liang S. and Zhou W . (2006), “Eco-env ironmental
Vulnerability Ev aluation in Mount ainous Region Using R emote Sensing and
GIS – A C ase St udy in the Upper R eac hes of Minjiang Riv er, China”,
Ecological Modelling: 192 (1), pp. 175-187.
u. Mc Harg I. (1992), Design W ith Nature, John Wileys & Sons, Inc, New York.
v. Mc Harg I. (1998), Steiner Frederick R. (ed) To Heal the Earth, Select ed
Writings of Ian L. McHarg, Island Press, Was hington D.C.
w. Millennium Ecosystem Ass essm ent (2005), Ec osystems and Human W ell-
being: Biodiv ersity Synthesis. W orld Resourc es Institute, Washington, DC.
x. Miller G.T. (2003), Env ironmental Scienc e, Working With Earth, 10th
edition, Brooks/C ole Thomson Learning USA.
y. Morris P. & Therivel R. (1995), Methods of Env ironment al Impact
Assess ment, The N atural and Built Env ironm ent Series 2, London
z. Mulongoy K.J. & Chape S. (2004), Prot ected Areas and Biodiversity : An
Ov erview of Key Issues
CBD Secretariat and UNEP-WC MC, February 2004. Biodiv ersity Series No
21.
aa. Penning – Ros well E.C. (1975), “Constraints of The Application of
Landsc ape Ev aluations”, Transactions of the Institut e of British
Geographers: 66 (N ovember), pp. 149 - 155.
bb. Ratclif f e D.A. (1977), A Nature C ons erv ation Rev iews, v ols. 1 and 2,
Cam bridge Univ ersity Press, Cambridge.
cc. Riau Islands Planning Agency (2004), Revision of 2006-2015 General
Regional Plan Riau Islands Regency (R anc angan Umum Tata Ruang
Wilayah Kab. Kepulauan Riau)
dd. Riau Islands Planning Agency and C V Geometric Tehnik (2005), Res earch
and Mapping of Water Rec harge and Catchments Potentials in Riau Island
Regency (Kajian dan Pemetaan Pot ens i Daerah R esapan dan Tangkapan
Air H ujan di Kab. Kepulauan Riau).
ee. Sac hs J. & Malaney P. (2002), “The economic and social burden of malaria”
in Nature 680-685, p 415,
ff. Saragedin, I. (2002), “W orld Pov erty and Hunger: A C hallenge f or Sc ience”,
Scienc e, 296 pp. 54-58
gg. Tanuwidjaja G. (2006), Dev eloping a Landscape Evaluation Tool in
Dev eloping Countries, Cas e St udies Bint an Island, Indonesia, Diss ertation
of Master of Science in Env ironmental Managem ent, National Univ ersity of
Singapore.
hh. Teluk Bintan District Of f ice (2006), Dist rict Statistics D ata 2005
I sland, Indonesia
ii. UNDP (2004), Human D ev elopm ent Report 2004: C ultural liberty in today ’s
div erse world
jj. UNEP-W CMC (2002) W orld Atlas of Biodiversity ,
kk. Urban Planning Guide (1986) (ASC E Manuals and R eports on Engineering
Practice; no 49), American Society of Civ il Engineers, New Y ork.
ll. Weiss S.F., Donnelly T.G. and Kaiser E.J. (1966), “Land Value and Land
Dev elopment I nf luence Factors: An Analy tical Approach f or Explaining
Policy Alternativ es” in Land Economics: 42 (2), pp 230-33.
mm. White E.T. (1985), Site Analysis: Diagramming I nformation f or
Arc hitectural Design, Arc hitectural Media, USA.
nn. Whitten T., Dam anik S.J., Anwar J., and Hisy am N. (2000), Ecology of
Sumatra, Periplus, Singapore.
oo. Wong T-C., Yuen B., and Goldblum C. (Eds.) (2008), Spatial Planning f or a
Sust ainable Singapore, Springer in Ass ociation wit h t he Singapore I nstitute
of Planners. Singapore;
pp. World Bank (2006), "Indones ia at a Glanc e,.Indonesia Developm ent
Indic ators and Data.”
qq. World Bank (2006), "Making the New Indonesia Work f or t he Poor -
Ov erview" (PDF ). Press release.
rr. World C omm ission on Environm ent and Dev elopment (1987), Our C omm on
Future, Report of the World Com mission on Env ironm ent and Dev elopment,
Published as Annex to General Ass em bly doc um ent A/ 42/427,
Dev elopment and I nternational C o-operation: Env ironment August 2, 1987.
ss. World Resources Institute (2001), World R esourc es 2000–
2001.W ashington DC: p. 246–248.
tt. World Res ources Instit ute, Forest Frontiers Initiativ e, WW F-Indonesia &
Telapak Indonesia Foundation (2000), Trial by Fire, Forest Fires and
Forestry Policy in Indonesia’s Era of Crisis and Reform.
uu. World Res ources Instit ute, Forest Watch Indonesia, Global Forest Watch
(2002), Stat e of the Forest Indonesia.
vv. World R esourc es Instit ute, U nited N ations Environm ent Programme, Unit ed
Nations Dev elopment Program me, and the W orld Bank, (1996), World
Resourc es: A Guide to the Global Environm ent: 1996-97, New York:
Oxf ord U niv ersity Press, 1996, p. xi.
ww. Wright R. & Nebel B. (2007) Env ironmental Scienc e, Toward A Sust ainable
Future: International Edition, 10th Edition, Pearson Education, I nc,
publishing as Benjamin Cummings
1.3.2 Website
a. http://app.mewr.gov .sg/data/ImgCont/1292/sust ainbleblueprint_f orweb.pdf
b. http://app.mewr.gov .sg/web/Cont ents/Contents.as px?ContId=1342
c. http://au.enc arta.ms n.com/ency clopedia_1461501471/Population_Ex plosio
n.html;
d. http://dictionary .ref erenc e.com/;
e. http://en. wik ipedia.org/ wiki/;
f . http://en. wik ipedia.org/ wiki/File:Population-m ilest ones.jpg

g. http://indonesia.usaid.gov /en/ Article.361. aspx
h. http://www. adb.org/D ocuments/Reports/39127-IN O/F actSheets/v illage-
plans.pdf
i. http://www.c ensus.gov/ipc/ www/popclock world. html, estimated by United
States C ens us Bureau on 5t h Sept ember 2009;
j. http://www. jica. go.jp/indonesia/englis h/activ ities/pdf /JICAinAceh.pdf
k. http://www. jurong.c om/
l. http://www. merriam-webster.com/
m. http://www. relief web.int/library/documents/2005/brr-idn-22sep.pdf
n. http://www.sc ribd.com/doc/13103851/Partic ipatory-Planning-in-Aceh-
URDIGTZ-Sem inar-2526-July-2008
1.4 Acknow ledgments

We exp ress ou r highe st appreciation for:
- Team of expert s: P rof Han Sun Sheng, Dr. Ho Hua Ch ew, Dr Sim on
Yanuar Put ra, Mr Be njamin Lee, Mrs Joyce Martha Widjaya, Mr
Alfrendo Sa tyanaga and M s Anb arasi Boopal.
- Scientific Officer and Ex-Di recto r of Spatial Planning Directo rate II,
Ministry of Public Wo rks, Indone sia: Dr,Ir.I. F.Poernom osidhi
Poerwo,M.Sc,M CIT,M IHT
- Bintan’s Go vernm ent Agencie s’ staff s: Ms Yanti, M r Ahmad and Mr
Buyung.
- Bintan People: Mr Udin, M r Bun Seng
- Banyan Tree Hotel s a nd Reso rt: Mr M ichael Kwe e, Mr. Mirza Pedju.
- Juro ng Con sultant s Pte Ltd: Mr Yue n Heng M un, Mr Alliste r Yong
Winston, M r Loh K wo k Pheng, M rs Noorliza
- Ministry of Trade and I ndu st ry, Singapo re: M s Amanda Ong.
- Re search A ssi stants: Mr Deny St, M r Septian Hornas and Mr Agus
Sudarm an.
I sland, Indonesia
1.5 The Writer’s Description

1.6 I. Pe rsonal Information
Full name : Guna wan Tanu widj aj a
e-mail : gunteitb@ yaho o.c om
website : htt p://gree nimpacti nd o. wordpress.co m/
Mobile Phon e : +62 812 2 12 20 8 4 2 (In do nesia)
Place of Birt h : Ba nd ung
Date of Birth : 08 of Aug ust 19 78
Sex : Male
Nation ality : Indon esia n
Mother : Indon esia n
Lang u age
Lang u age S kill : Indon esia n, E ng lish
1.7 II. Education Backgrounds
Formal E ducatio n
Graduated
Name of StudyT ime
City/Countr y from (Month Speci alization GPA
Institution (Months/Years)
and Ye ar)
3.8 6
National MSc
Univ ersit yof Singapore 1 year October 2 006 Environment from
Singapore Management sca le of
5
Bandung
Institute of 2.7 3
Technology Bandung / Bachelor of from
5 year s Jul y of 2 00 1
(Institut Indonesia Archit ecture sca le of
Teknologi 4
Bandung)
1.8 III. Informa l Educ ation
StudyT ime (Y ear s) Name of Institution Course Nam e & Speci alization
200 8 Sing apore Ins titute o f Pla nner Spati al Pla nning for a Sust aina ble
Sing apore (1-da y se minar)
200 8 Lee Ku an Yew Scho ol Of Public "Lesso ns Not to Le arn fro m
Policy American Cities" b y Prof Alan
Altshuler (Half-d ay se min ar)
200 7 Nation al University o f Sing apore , Short Course On "A – Z Of Oil &
Facult y o f E ng ineering , P AC Gas To Petroche micals (3- da ys
(Profession al Activities Cen tre) semin ar)
200 7 Sing apore Ins titute o f Pla nner Destinati on Res orts, The Next
Wa ve
StudyT ime (Y ear s) Name of Institution Course Nam e & Speci alization
(1-da y se minar)
200 7 Sing apore Ins titute o f Pla nner, Semi nar o f Pla nning of Is kan dar
Malaysia Institut e o f Plann er a nd Developme nt R egion (1-d a y
Universiti K eb angsa an Mal aysia semin ar)
200 1 The British Instit ute IELTS Prep aration Co urse
200 0 Lang u ag e Cen ter ITB Eng lish Writing Course
199 9 Gradasi Bulletin St ud ent U nion of Journalistic Training
Architect ure G unadh arma ( IMA-
Gun adharma)
199 7 Architect ure De part ment ITB AutoC ad R 14 Traini ng
199 3-19 95 Saint Ang ela’s Eng lish Co urse Eng lish Course level C6 to C11
199 0-19 92 Saint Ang ela’s Eng lish Co urse Eng lish Course l evel J2 to J5
1.9 IV. W orking Exper ienc e
Name of Contract
City/ Countries Position Job Des cription
Institute/Companies Periods
Green Impact Ban du ng Manager Team L ead er March 20 03
Ind onesi a Integ rate d and Urban to no w
Urban, Drain ag e a nd Plann er
Environme ntal
Planning Consult an t
Ag ency f or Research Ban du ng Urban Assistant Octob er 2 008
and De velo p men t, Planni ng an d to no w
Institu te of Water Manag e men t
Resources, Ministry Expert
of Public W or ks,
Repu blic of
Ind onesi a,
Jurong Cons ultants Sing apore Plann er Physical November
Pte Ltd ., Pl anning Plann er 2006 t o
Division Octob er 2 008
Nation al Par ks Sing apore Intern Researcher July 20 06 to
Board, Rep ublic of Aug 20 06
Sing apore
Ag ency f or Research Ban du ng / Junior GIS E xpert Jan 200 5 -
and De velo p men t, Indonesi a Research er Assistant (Arc Aug 20 05
Institu te of Water View 3. 2), in
Resources, Ministry Polder T ea m
of Public W or ks,
Repu blic of
Ind onesi a,
Sat yamitra J asapuri Ban du ng / Junior House, Fact ory Aug 20 03 -

Eng ineering Indonesi a Architect, and Café Desig n Dec 20 04
Estimator
PT. Trinitas B uana Ban du ng / Junior Apart ment Aug 20 02 -
Utama Indonesi a Architect Desig n Aug 20 03
I sland, Indonesia
Name of Contract
City/ Countries Position Job Des cription
Institute/Companies Periods
PT. I mesco Dito Jakarta/ In do nesia Junior Junior Archit ect Jan 200 2 –
Architect Aug 20 02
COMBINE Ban du ng / Junior Urban Aug 2001 -
Indonesi a Research er Develop me nt Jan 200 2
Research,
especi ally on
Urban G arbag e
Manag e men t
CV. Cipta Bina Ban du ng / Work Train ee Junior Archit ect May - J uly
Saran a Indonesi a 200 1
ASPEK Ban du ng / Prog ram Garbage Jan 200 0 -
Indonesi a Facilitator Manag e men t , Aug 20 01
Communit y Mechanism
Reco ver y Making and
Prog ram Controlling of
(CRP-HUI) in Coop erati ve
RW 11, Credit Unit
Cibang kong
District
1.1 0 V. Resear ch, Planning & De sign W orks
Name of Proj ect Position Year
Under Gre en Impa ct
Indonesia
Assistanc e f or Directorat e of Team L eader a nd Urban Dec 20 09
Spati al Pla nning , Pu blic Plann er
Wor ks Depart men t (20 09),
Sustaina ble Urban
Impro vemen t Progra m
(SUSIP) - Exec uti ve
Presen tatio n
Drainage Master Plan Team L eader a nd Urban Apr – Dec 200 9
Revitalisatio n in Plann er
Summareco n, K elap a
Gading , J akarta, I ndonesia
Hospital Preliminar y Design Team L eader a nd Senior Apr – Aug 2 00 9
and St ud y in Pang aleng an, Architect
West J ava , Indo nesia
(Proposal to KPB S, Milk
Produc er Coopera tive in
Pang ale ng an)
Communit y Bas ed Team Lead er a nd Aug 20 09
Develop me nt R evitalisatio n in Environme ntalist
PT Newmont N usa
Teng g ara, Su mba, N usa
Tengg ara Barat, I ndon esia
(Proposal)

Tradition al Market Mapping , Team L eader a nd Urban Aug 20 09
GIS Dat abase an d Anal ysis Plann er
in th e fra mewor k of
Impl ementi ng Preside ntial
Decree No 112/2 007 on
Develop ment of Tra dition al
Market a nd Rel ocation of
Modern Mar ket in In don esia
(Proposal to Ministr y of Trad e
of Republic of Ind onesia)
Integ rat ed Wat er Reso urces Team Lead er a nd Aug 20 09
Manag ement Pla n f or Environme ntalist
Barang kal Ri ver, sub
catchme nt of Bra nt as River
Basin, i n relati on wit h S ocial
Aspect a nd Instit ution
Capacit y Building (Pro posal
to JICA)
“9 Pe arl” Element ary Sch ool Team Lead er a nd Architect 200 3
in Ba ndung
Proposal 9 9’ers Radi o Sc hool Team Lead er a nd Architect 200 3
(Proposal)
Under Jurong Consultants
Pte Ltd.
Preliminary Stud y a nd Brief Plann er 200 7 to 2 008
Develop me nt Concept of
QEZ3, Petroche mical
Compl e x, Q atar
Dera Bassi D etaile d Mast er Plann er 200 7 to 2 008
Plan, Great er Moh ali Area,
Punja b, Indi a
Lib ya Africa Ec on omic City Plann er 200 7 to 2 008
Wonog iri Industrial Par k, Plann er 200 7 to 2 008
Ind onesi a (Guan xi Stat e
Farm - Bio fuel Plan t)
Master Pla n A n Ta y Industrial Plann er 200 7
Servic e Ce ntre
Master Pla n Zh angzho u Assistant Plann er 200 6-20 07
Wat erfront City, Chin a
Master Pla n AMRL Assistant Plann er 200 7
Intern atio nal T ech City, T amil
Nadu, India
W ith MSc Env ironmental

Management P rogram
“Neotie wpia” Ec o Villag e Plann er & Environment alist 200 6
Master Pla n in Kranji
I sland, Indonesia

Sing apore
Under SJP Engine ering
BTC Café Junior Architect 200 4
Kop omas Fac tor y Junior Architect 200 4
Privat e Houses Ba nd ung Junior Archit ect, Desig n 200 3 – 2 004
Develop ment
Under PT. Trinitas Buan a
Utama
Rental H ouses in B an du ng Studi o Co ordina tor 200 2 – 2 003

Bukit Resi k Exclusi ve Studi o Co ordina tor 200 2 – 2 003
Apar men t
Site Pl an “S. Par ma n” Elite Studi o Co ordina tor 200 2
Housing
Under PT. Imes co Dito
Privat e Houses i n Jakarta Junior Architect 200 2
Freel ance Proj ect
Cibang kong Lo w Cost Final Year Stud ent 200 1
Housing , B and ung I ndon esia
Desig n Develop ment of Junior Archit ect, Desig n 200 1
KARANG SETRA Hotel, Spa Develop ment
and Cottag es, B andu ng
Ind onesi a u nd er Cipta Bina
Sarana
Master Pla n o f Cipulir Junior Architect 200 1
Housing Site Pla n, Ja karta
und er Prof Ir. Da nisworo
1.1 1 VI. Awards, Pre stige, Activ ities, and Publi cation
Awa rds/ Best Dissert ation Prizes fro m Sh ell, MEM National Uni versity of Sing ap ore, 20 06-
Prestige 200 7
Shell Gra nt Bursar y Hold er in MEM Na tion al Uni versit y of Si ng apore , 2 00 5-20 06
Second C ha mpio n of Desig n Co mp etitio n o f I nfor mal Trad ers St and h eld b y Th e
Municipal\ G o vern ment of Kot a B andu ng, Pra ksis dan IMA-Gunad har ma ITB Y ear
200 1
Activ itie s Ban du ng Ind epen dent Li ving Ce nter (B ILIC)
200 3 - 2 004 : Vol untary Att en da nt for Difabl e (Disable) Person
200 3 : Coordi nat or Rese arch Tea m in Accessibilit y Issue for Difa ble (Disable)
Person in Se veral Loc ation in Ba ndung
Forum Gelar K ot a B and ung (City Devel opme nt Discussion Foru m)
200 2 : F oru m Gel ar Ko ta Secret ariat
200 1 : J uni or Rese archer
Ikata n Ma hasiswa Arsite ktur Gun adhar ma IT B (Gu na dhar ma Stu dent Uni on of
Architect ure Depart men t of ITB)

200 1 Me mb er of L egislative Bodies of IMA - Gu na dh arma
Me mb er of Sustain able Hu man S ettle ment Discussi on Group
Co ordin ator of TOR T eam of S ustaina ble Huma n S ettlement Se min ar
199 9 – 2 000 Co ordin ator of Gra dasi (Archit ect ure B ulletin of IMA-G)
OSIS SMAK I BP K Pen abur (Stu dent Unio n o f B PK P enab ur Se nior High School)
OSIS SMP St Alo ysius (Stu de nt Union of St Alo ysius Ju nior Hig h Sch ool)
Publications Integ ratio n o f Sustai na ble Pl anni ng Policy a nd D esig n of Lo w-Cost Ap artment , in
the C ont e xt of S ustai nable Urba n De velop ment, National Se minar of Lo w-Cost
Apart ment, Mar ana th a Uni versit y, Ba nd ung, I ndonesia, 2 009.
Bambo os as Sus tainabl e a nd Aff orda ble Mat erial for Ho using as one o f alt erna tife
mat erial of Low-Cost Ap artment , Nati on al Se minar of Lo w-Cost Ap artment,
Maranat ha Universit y, Ban du ng , In do nesia, 2 009.
Guidelin es f or De veloping P older S yste m in Indo nesia, Ag ency for Res earch an d
Developme nt, Instit ut e of Water Resourc es, Ministr y of Pu blic Works, Republic
of I ndo nesi a, 2 00 8-20 09 .
Developi ng a L an dsca pe E valuatio n To ol for De veloping Countries, Case S tudies
Binta n Isla nd, In donesia , MSc E nvironme nt Ma nag e me nt Pr og ram, Na tional
Universit y of Singap ore (Best Dissertati on Award)
Report of Res earch in Accessibilit y Iss ue for Difa ble (Disable) Perso n in Se veral
Loca tion i n Ban dung
Reports of B an du ng Urban Discussion F orum o n Urba n S olid W aste Man ag ement,
Janu ary 2 002.
Reports of B an du ng Urban Discussion F orum in Housing Needs, Aug ust 20 01.
Thesis of Design St udio , Cas e o f L ow Eco no my Flat f or Cibang kong Villag e,
Ban du ng , In don esia (Keluraha n Ciba ng kong ), The me Pa ttern Lang uag e
Architect ure
Seminar Re port of Ho using Devel opme nt B ased o n Lo w Ec onomy Pe ople .

Applying Integrated Ecological Planning and ALIT For Developing Countries

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Applying Integrated Ecological Planning and ALIT For Developing Countries

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Green Imp act Indonesia

Integrated U rban, D rainage and Environm ental

Applying Integrated Ecologi cal Planning a nd

infrastructure planning such as water management, mass transportation,

One of the important steps of ecological planning is the landsc ape

Our researc h involv es identify ing the k ey elements of all ev aluation

The proposed sy stem is comprehensive y et manageable and practic able.

We understands that there are c onstrains in method application due to

Keywords: Integrated Ecological Planning, Landsc ape Evaluation, Land

First, the world’s population ha s increased e xponentially from 2.521

Secondly, we al so believe that ant hrop ocentri sm and liberalism justify

The current economic system wa s al so foun d unsu stainable because of

Figure 1 Population Dens ity Map of the World. (So urce:

Figure 2 The C om bined Env ironment al Impact of Population,

Land, a s o ne earth’s resources, also faces de velopment pressure. Due

Figure 5 The World’s Ant hropogenic Biomes (Land D ev elopment) in

Understanding the complexity of the developing count rie s cont ext, we

Figure 7 Relationship bet ween Biodiv ersity Hotspot Location and

One of real exam ple of e xten si ve defore station an d biodiversity loss is

Fu rther, other repo rt s sho wed th at 1,708,750 to 1,871,500 ha of f ore sts

Figure 8 Natural Forest Cov er Change in Indonesia, 1985 – 1997.

Figure 9 Forest Cov er and 1997-1998 Forest Fires in Western Indonesia.

Figure 10 Biotic Ric hness: Percent of World’s Species Found in

It can be con cluded, that major problem s such a s re source depletion,

On the cont ra ry, the im plementation of sustainable spatial planning

The Singapore planning was done with m eticulous effo rt of the

Hi storically, the sust ainable spatial planning wa s invented in b y Ian

Figure 12 The Integrated Spatial Planning with Ecological Approach.

Condu cting m ultidisciplinary landscape e valuation to determine the

Evaluating of local natural re sou rce s, such a s wate r reso urce s,

1.1 Des cription

To develop integrated method of land scape evaluation, the autho rs t ried

These previou s re sea rch es in land scape evaluation o r site e valuation

1. Approa che s fo r Gene ral A rea s : McHarg (1 992); A nderson (2000);

parallel to our intention to deliver a sim ple evaluation m ethod for

We fu rther re fined and validated the m ethods du ring application. And

1.1.1 Landscape Evaluation Method

1. Defining the Pu rpo se, Scope & Context of the E valuation

OTH ER NA TURAL ECOLOGICAL SO CIA L & ECON O MIC

CO N SERVA TION EXP EN SIVE D EVELOP MEN T MO ST SU ITA BLE

STA KEH OLDERS

- RECO MMEN DATION O F LA ND

Figure 13 ALiT’s (Adaptiv e Landscape Ev aluation Tool) Methodology .

And we would describe the m ethodology of ALiT in detail below.

1.1.1.1 Defining the Purpose, Scope & Context of t he

We sugge st compulso ry purp o se, which are:

- evaluating and protecting area fo r con se rvation

Two additional alternative pu rposes a re suggested, such a s:

- determ ining the suitability of certain development to ce rtain location

Originally, we adopted the possible land u se of ALiT from Anderson

1.1.1.2 Criteria Selection & Secondary Data Collection

available such a s patch size, rarity of plant and animal specie s,

Group 2A Dat a Set wa s prepared t o mea sure the suitability for

1.1.1.3 GIS Dat abase Processing

We believe th at GIS (Geographic Inform ation Syst em ) software should

1.1.1.4 Rapid Survey

Fu rther, other im portant po ssible acce ss or mode of tran sport al so

Other poten tial hazard s al so mu st be identified, su ch a s: wetland s, flood

1.1.1.5 Expert Consult ation ( Semi Delphi)

Tabel 2 Sample of Ranking Criteria f or ALiT

No Criteria H ighest C onservation Most Suitable for

A1 Ecosystem Type Highest C onserv ation Lowest Conserv ation

This approach wa s originally pre scribed by M cHa rg (1998). Late r, we