CC BY
0
DOI https://doi.org/10.18551/rjoas.2020-11.25
THE KOTAKU: STUDY OF THE NATIONAL SLUM UPGRADING PROGRAM SUSTAINABLY IN COASTAL AREAS
Pratama Alamsyah*
Postgraduate Program, Planning and Regional Development, University of Hasanuddin,
Makassar, Indonesia
Jamil M.H.
Faculty of Agriculture, University of Hasanuddin, Makassar, Indonesia
Barkey Roland A.
Faculty of Forestry, University of Hasanuddin, Makassar, Indonesia
*E-mai: alamsyahpratama65@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
This study aims to describe the KOTAKU program in dealing with slums in coastal areas reviewed from the aspect of sustainable development. This study site is in Lappa Village, Sinjai Regency, South Sulawesi. This study uses descriptive qualitative methods with logic analysis approaches that include data collection, data reduction, data display, and data verification. The results showed that the handling of settlements through the KOTAKU program in practice has not met the aspects of sustainable development in coastal areas. First, the handling of environmental damage caused by sea tides and seasonal flooding is still not optimal. This caused the built infrastructure to become damaged and led to the re-emergence of slums. Second, the existence of indigenous and cultures forms the community's concern for the neighborhood environment and their participation in the KOTAKU program. This is supported by the tendency to establish a good relationship (mappideceng) with fellow human beings and the environment which is one of the Buginese cultural philosophies that is well maintained by coastal communities. Third, it has not been empowered economically by the community, resulting difficulties in the settelement and infrastructure maintenance. Community independence in slums requires financial support if it is not supported by adequate finances then the sustainability of development will not occur.
KEY WORDS
The KOTAKU program, slums, sustainable, coastal areas.
Urban slums are growing as a community response to meet their housing needs. This is characterized by the number of population densities and uneven economic activity impacting the decrease in the quality of urban settlements (Mukhija, 2010; Sobotova, 2011). The existence of slums also impacted society both physically and psychologically. Slums are one of the most complex problems for developing countries such as Indonesia. The characteristics of slums in Indonesia describe residential areas that physically have unhealthy environmental conditions such as dirty, chaotic, humid, and others (Hariyanto, 2015; Kustiwan & Ramadhan, 2019; Ramadhan & Pigawati, 2014).
Slums are often associated with coastal areas. This is due to the existence of coastal areas as strategic economic gateways of a region or city (Mahnunah & Syahbana, 2014). Coastal slums are quite a complex problem, considering that it deals with many aspects such as the physical aspects of the environment, economic, social, cultural, and psychological of society (Andreasen & M0ller-Jensen, 2016; Nuryadin et al., 2019; Uddin, 2018). The area is one of the government's pilot projects to realize habitable and sustainable urban settlements.
The government and nUsP-2 (National Slum Upgrading and Neighborhood Upgrading and Shelter Project Phase 2) work together to handling slums through the City Without Slums (KOTAKU) program. The KOTAKUs is a program of handling slums based on a
community empowerment approach implemented through partnerships of government, local government, community, and private sector as well as strengthening the institutional capacity of the region to ensure the implementation of housing development and residential areas in urban areas that are independent and sustainable and pro-poor (Ahmad et al., 2019; Rohimat et al., 2018; Sari et al., 2018; Septanaya et al., 2020).
The impact provided by the KOTAKU program has succeeded in reducing the area of slums in several priority areas of handling in recent years. However, the handling program is oriented only by physical intervention, and there has been no innovation in the handling of sustainable slums. This is incompatible with the SDG's (Sustainable Development Goal's) 11th target of "By 2030, ensure access for all to adequate, safe and affordable housing and basic services and upgrade slums" (UN Habitat, 2016). Some countries that handle slums through physical intervention also show similar symptoms (Andreasen & M0ller-Jensen, 2016; Sticzay & Koch, 2015). This shows that despite the increased attention in the handling of slums. But, no fair and sustainable handler solution is widely accepted by all (Elrayies, 2016; Mahabir et al., 2016; Sibyan, 2020; Singh, 2014; Turok & Borel-Saladin, 2018).
The context of the slum handling program should attribute the concept of sustainable development that lays out the philosophy of designing physical objects, built environments, and services to adhere to sustainable economic, social and ecological principles (Cronin, 2012; Hoelman et al., 2016; Hopwood et al., 2005; Minnery et al., 2013; Nuryadin et al., 2019; Santosa & Astuti, 2009). The discussion of inclusive development arises from several perspectives that expressly state that the city is for all of us (UN Habitat, 2016).
Some studies have provided an overview of the handling of slums based on aspects of sustainable development from different perspectives. The application of environmental aspects is seen as prevention of damage and environmental pollution (Degert et al., 2016; Elrayies, 2016; Goswami & Manna, 2013; Sunarti et al., 2019). At the social aspects of participatory processes, the environmental aspect with consideration of environmental damage due to residential activities, and the economic aspect of the development of the economic development of the settlement areas (Gunari et al., 2017; Majale, 2008; Peerapun, 2012; Prayitno, 2016; Singh, 2014). Degert (2016) saw that the social aspect is more advanced through the improvement of the community's ability in its regional planning and regional development. From the economic aspect of slum handling is seen from efforts to increase the economy of the community and efforts to open/create jobs (Mahabir et al., 2016; Degert et al., 2016). Besides, the handling of slums also pays attention to the improvement and economic skills of the community (Elrayies, 2016; Sticzay & Koch, 2015). The handling of slums requires a deep study in looking at the handling of both environmental, social, economic, and institutional aspects. The interconnectedness between aspects of each other that can determine the sustainability of a slum handling program (Idawarni, 2009; Jayanimitta & Mardiansjah, 2019).
Previous research has revealed the concept of sustainable development with the handling of slums from environmental aspects, social aspects and economic aspects. However, there are still differences of opinion with each other. This is due to the absence of a definitive concept of the implementation of the ongoing principles of the slum handling program. This condition is very worrying considering the need for housing is a fundamental part of every human right of life. We are faced with the fact that slums are a reflection of the complexity of the city.
This study will examine the KOTAKU program in coastal areas in order to provide new insights into the handling of sustainable slums.This program has been implemented in 271 districts/cities in 34 provinces that become a collaboration platform or priority handling base. The handling of slums in coastal areas is different from the handling of urban slums. This is because coastal areas have a vulnerability to climate change conditions, environment, social, economic, and cultural communities. This study can support previous study related to the problem of handling slums that are only physically oriented but do not look in terms of sustainability.
METHODS OF RESEARCH
This study uses qualitative-descriptive methods. Merriam & Tisdell (2016:9) explained that qualitative-descriptive study methods as study that understands phenomena experienced by study subjects and seeks to describe a symptom, event, and event that occurs at this time. The study was conducted in Lappa Village, Sinjai Regency, South Sulawesi Province. Data collection is carried out with observation of slums that have been handled, documentation, and interviews with key informants. In this study, researchers chose informants who were considered to know information and problems in-depth and could be trusted as valid data sources. Based on these criteria, the parties used as informants are those directly involved in the KOTAKU program. The list of selected informants can be viewed in Table 1. Data analysis techniques using Logical Analysis from Miles & Huberman (1994) that divide analysis activities into several parts include data collection, data reduction, data presentation, and conclusion drawing.
Table 1 - List of Informants
No Name Position
1 Sudirman Museng Program Coordinator of the KOTAKU Sinjai Regency
2 Amiruddin Latief Chairman of Community Self-Reliance Agency (BKM) Bahari Sejahtera Lappa
3 Nur Alamsyah Secretary of Headman Lappa Village
Source: Author's study, processed from direct interview transcript with key informant.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The dynamics of the city developments are inseparable from the problems of slums, especially Lappa Village. Before the handling program, Lappa Village was one of the largest slums in the Sinjai Regency. This is characterized by low environmental quality mixed with trade and housing functions, drainage network system has not been integrated with the urban system, the waste management system is inadequate and environmental damage due to sea tides. Efforts to handle settlements through the Program City Without Slums (KOTAKU) in Lappa Village are the form of improving the quality of the residential environment, mobility of road access, drainage channels, procurement of green open space, and waste management in 2018-2020.
The implementation of the KOTAKU program in terms of environmental physicals shows that before the program of handling slums, almost some residential areas experienced flooding ranging from 5-20 cm each year, this is due to the lack of water supply areas and drainage networks that have not been able to accommodate and drain water runoff into rivers or seas. Through the handling carried out by the KOTAKU program can handle inundation/flooding in most locations, but at the time of the researchers asked directly to one of the key informants namely the Chairman of Community Self-Reliance Agency (BKM) Bahari Sejahtera Lappa, Mr. Amiruddin Latief said that:
"The handling is to repair and dredge sedimentation drainage along the river bank has been done but has not been able to accommodate water runoff if the tide raised"
Mr. Amiruddin's statement indicated that the handling of the sea tide was still not optimal even though the handling had been done. Whereas the KOTAKU program before the implementation of slum handling there is a safeguarding activity that is conducting a study of the impact of environmental and social damage. Less holistic handling is also seen from the unhandled of other components that contribute to environmental pollution in Lappa Village. In the Lappe'e neighborhood, many community sewerage drains are directed directly to ponds, and public bathing infrastructure that has been built is not used by the surrounding community, the management of garbage bin procurement that aims to solve the garbage problem is still not optimal so Lappa Village along the road is still filled with garbage because garbage trucks from the Sinjai Regency Hygiene Office have not reached the entire area in the road map of garbage can transport. So, that dominant residential facilities, as well as trade and services, dump their garbage into sewers and roadsides.
The KOTAKU program on the physical aspects of the environment shows that the handling of slums in Lappa Village is still not fully concerned with the environmental aspects of sustainability. Degert et al. (2016) stated that sustainable development in realizing a sustainable environment is a development that can improve the quality of its environment by not damaging the environment and preserving the environment. The KOTAKU program has not fully conducted an in-depth environmental and impacts prevention review, the discharge of sea tides runoff still exceeds the capacity of drainage channels that have built so that the tide surge back into the residential area and flooding is not resolved properly. Hanifah & Widiyastuti (2016) stated that the tide of the sea not only damages the environment and buildings of the house but also causes damage to the road as the accessibility of the environment. This means the environment can become rundown again and the infrastructure that has built will become damaged. On the other hand, there is still no management of sewage and waste in this area that has the potential to pollute the river and the environment more massively.
The KOTAKU program is community empowerment-based program so that the implementation of the program involves the active role of the community from the beginning to the end of the activity. The form of community involvement in the program of handling slums in the form of energy and materials through the work of devotion and mutual cooperation at the stage of implementation of development and infrastructure improvement. While at the supervisory stage, community participation in the form of material checks and supervision of construction work was carried out by Community Self-Reliance Agency (BKM). The presence of kotaku program shows the involvement of all groups (social inclusion) in the handling of slums, especially women. As the following statement by Mr. Nur Alamsyah:
"This kind of hope becomes the cornerstone of social responsibility measures carried out by the lappa community. Women's involvement in the KOTAKU program is proposed/suggestion of slum management activities and consumption preparation at the time of implementation of the KOTAKU program"
Mr. Nur Alamsyah's statement reflects the seriousness of the community in the program of handling slums from all groups of the community. Besides, women also have representation in the Community Self-Reliance Agency (BKM).
The handling of the KOTAKU program is also visible after the implementation of the program has been completed. Based on the observations at the study site shows that the form of public concern for the handling program and the environment of the settlement in the form of cooperation to make green open space, the coloring of each citizen's house, providing pots of ornamental plants to beautify residential areas and create tagline boards invites the community to maintain cleanliness and prohibit littering. The establishment of community concern for the environment and their participation in the KOTAKU program is supported by the existence of a tendency to establish a good relationship (mappideceng) with fellow human beings and the surrounding environment which is one of Bugis cultural philosophy that is still maintained by the indigenous people of lappa. This kind of hope becomes the cornerstone of social responsibility measures carried out by the lappa community.
Dahlan et al., (2020) said that establishing togetherness will bring compassion (asse nyaha) as a human being, to alleviate any burdens or concerns for future survival. Although, in some locations of priority handling there is still a less clean lifestyle and apathy towards the handling program. This is due to the lack of awareness of maintaining the environmental quality of their settlements and the urbanization factor with the large number of migrants living in the population density and the onset of slums in the region.
The handling of slums through the KOTAKU program has fulfilled the sustainable social aspect. The result of the implementation can be used as social capital for Lappa Village in the sustainability of future programs. This is following opinion, Majale (2008) saw that if community participation is implemented and maintained properly it will bring sustainability to a project. Continuity of the handling program with sustainable social change can be achieved through community development in the form of the involvement of all aspects of the community, participation, empowerment, and ability of the community in the implementation
of development (Degert et al., 2016; Elrayies, 2016). Besides, the implementation of the KOTAKU program also shows the concept of community development. Leyenaar et al., (2018) describes that the development of a community with a "multi-layered". This process describes the relationship and capacity of the community to influence social change and improve the ability of the community in the implementation of development.
Slum handling programs must be handled across sectoral not only in the physical structuring of buildings but also aligned with the handling of social and economic aspects. Reviewed from the economic aspects,, the KOTAKU program has no activities or training that support people's skills in empowerment. However, during the implementation of the KOTAKU program, the community is absorbed into the aid workforce but only temporary during construction and repair implementation. People who are in labor are unemployed or do not have permanent jobs. The absorption of this workforce without specific requirements and prior training so that the proposed community will work immediately while the work takes place. The improvement in the economic field is also related to the management and maintenance of the infrastructure built. In practice, the KOTAKU program in Lappa Village does not have the allocation of funds for the management and maintenance of the infrastructure that has been built. As revealed by Mr. Sudirman Museng as program coordinator of KOTAKU Sinjai Regency to researchers:
"The KOTAKU program does not provide funding for infrastructure management that has been built after the program ends."
A statement from Mr. Sudirman Museng indicated that the program has no planning in the preparation of management allocation and maintenance of the infrastructure built. The KOTAKU program directs infrastructure maintenance funds through community dues.
A similar statement was expressed by Mr. Amiruddin Latief as Chairman of Community Self-Reliance Agency (BKM) Bahari Sejahtera Lappa who said:
"Maintenance funds are carried out through community dues, and the role of BKM is more towards monitoring development outcomes."
Mr. Amiruddin Latief's statement shows that funding sources for the management and maintenance of basic infrastructures such as road access, drainage, green open space, and waste are sourced from community dues. Meanwhile, dues from the community are still accidental and untested implementation.
The explanation illustrates that the implementation of the handling of slums through the KOTAKU program has not fully fulfilled the economic aspects of sustainability. Most of the lappa community is underserved. This is characterized by the number of uninhabitable homes in this area so that it is necessary to increase the economic capacity of the community to make the environment better and maintain the infrastructure built. The application of sustainable economic principles is characterized by an increase in people's income and economic skills supported by adequate finances in slums (Cronin, 2012; Sticzay & Koch, 2015). The sustainable economic aspect of the slum is also related to the provision of management and maintenance funds for the built infrastructure (Degert et al., 2016). Community independence in slums requires financial support if it is not supported financially adequately then the sustainability of development will not occur.
CONCLUSION
This study has described the program of handling slums in coastal areas to realize habitable, inclusive, and sustainable urban settlements. First, the handling of environmental damage caused by sea tides and seasonal flooding is still not optimal despite the treatment, the KOTAKU program has not fully conducted a comprehensive environmental impact assessment analysis in coastal areas. This has an impact on the infrastructure that has been built into disrepair and led to the re-emergence of slums. Second, The establishment of community concern for the environment and their participation in the KOTAKU program is supported by the existence of a tendency to establish a good relationship (mappideceng) with fellow human beings and the surrounding environment which is one of Bugis cultural philosophy that is still maintained by the indigenous people of lappa. The result of the
implementation of the KOTAKU program can be used as social capital for Lappa Village in the sustainability of future programs. Third, it has not been empowered by the community to economically make it difficult for people to maintain the quality of the settlements and maintain the infrastructure built. Community independence in slums requires financial support if it is not supported by adequate finances then the sustainability of development will not occur.
REFERENCES
1. Ahmad, H., Indar, Palluturi, S., Suriah, & Yani, A. (2019). Management of slum settings through the private city program (Kotaku) towards a city of health, makassar indonesia. Indian Journal of Public Health Research and Development, 10(9), 1580-1582. https://doi.org/10.5958/0976-5506.2019.02675.5.
2. Andreasen, M. H., & M0ller-Jensen, L. (2016). Beyond the networks: Self-help services and post-settlement network extensions in the periphery of Dar es Salaam. Habitat International, 53, 39-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2015.11.003.
3. Cronin, V. L. M. (2012). Slum upgrading in India and Kenya: investigating the sustainability (Issue October) [University of Cambridge]. http://www.dspace.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/242378.
4. Dahlan, L., Triyuwono, I., & Djamhuri, A. (2020). WHY MSMEs DO SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY? A STUDY ON THE TRADITIONAL BUGIS FISHING BUSINESS IN INDONESIA. Russian Journal of Agricultural and Socio-Economic Sciences, 100(4), 1016. https://doi.org/10.18551/rjoas.2020-04.02.
5. Degert, I., Parikh, P., & Kabir, R. (2016). Sustainability assessment of a slum upgrading intervention in Bangladesh. CITIES: The International Journal of Urban Policy and Planning, 56, 63-73. https://doi.org/10.1016Zj.cities.2016.03.002.
6. Elrayies, G. M. (2016). Rethinking Slums: An Approach for Slums Development towards Sustainability. Journal of Sustainable Development, 9(6), 225. https://doi.org/10.5539/jsd.v9n6p225.
7. Goswami, S., & Manna, P. S. (2013). Urban Poor Living in Slums: A Case Study of Raipur City in India. Global Journal of Human Social Science Sociology & Culture, 13(4). https://globaljournals.org/GJHSS_Volume13.
8. Gunari, B. F., Persada, C., & Ansar, Z. (2017). Priority Factors for Community Participation in the Planning Stage of Neighborhood Upgrading Shelter and Sector Project in Bandar Lampung. The Indonesian Journal of Planning and Development, 2(2), 87-93. https://doi.org/10.14710/ijpd.2.2.87-93.
9. Hanifah, W., & Widiyastuti, D. (2016). Penilaian Lingkungan Fisik Permukiman Kumuh di Kawasan Pesisir Kota Semarang. Jurnal Bumi Indonesia, 5(1), 1-10.
10. Hariyanto, A. (2015). Strategi Penanganan Kawasan Kumuh Sebagai Upaya Menciptakan Lingkungan Perumahan dan Permukiman Yang Sehat. PWK Unisba, 4, 1137.
11. Hoelman, M., Parshusip, B., Eko, S., Bahagijo, S., & Santono, H. (2016). Sutainable Development Goals- SDGs - Panduan Untuk Pemerintah Daerah dan Pemangku Kepentingan Daerah. International NGO Forum on Indonesian Development (INFID.
12. Hopwood, B., Mellor, M., & O'Brien, G. (2005). Sustainable Development: Mapping Different Approaches. Sustainable Development, 13(25), 38-52. https://doi.org/DOI: 10.1002/sd.244.
13. Idawarni. (2009). The Harmony Concept Between Government Program and Community Need to Achieve Sustainability. In CIB Working Commission W110 Informal Settlements and Affordable Housing (Issue 2).
14. Jayanimitta, M. E., & Mardiansjah, F. H. (2019). Residents ' Assessment in Kaligawe Slum Area , Semarang. The Indonesian Journal of Planning and Development, 4(2), 3848. https://doi.org/10.14710/ijpd.4.2.38-48.
15. Kustiwan, I., & Ramadhan, A. (2019). Urban-Kampong Environment Quality Improvement Strategies towards Inclusive and Sustainable City Development: Lessons from Bandung
City. Journal of Regional and Rural Development Planning, 3(1), 64. https://doi.org/10.29244/jp2wd.2019.3.1.64-84.
16. Leyenaar, M., Mcleod, B., & Chan, J. (2018). A Scoping Study And Qualitative Assessment Of Care Planning And Case Management In Community Paramedicine. Irish Journal of Paramedicine, 3(July), 1-15. https://bit.ly/2mMR6YA.
17. Mahabir, R., Crooks, A., Croitoru, A., & Agouris, P. (2016). The study of slums as social and physical constructs: Challenges and emerging research opportunities. Regional Studies, Regional Science, 3(1), 399-419. https://doi.org/10.1080/21681376.2016.1229130.
18. Mahnunah, N., & Syahbana, J. A. (2014). Gaps between Policy and Implementation. Jurnal Pembangunan Wilayah & Kota, 10(3), 330. https://doi.org/10.14710/pwk.v10i3.7789.
19. Majale, M. (2008). Employment creation through participatory urban planning and slum upgrading: The case of Kitale, Kenya. Habitat International, 32(2), 270-282. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2007.08.005.
20. Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation (Fourth Edi, Vol. 3, Issue 2). Jossey-Bass. http://booksupport.wiley.com
21. Miles, M., & Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analiysis : An Expanded Sourcebook. In SAGE Publication (Vol. 1304, pp. 89-92). https://vivauniversity.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/milesandhuberman1994.pdf.
22. Minnery, J., Argo, T., Winarso, H., Hau, D., Veneracion, C., Forbes, D., & Childs, I. (2013). Slum upgrading and urban governance: Case studies in three South East Asian cities. Habitat International, 39, 162-169. https://doi.org/10.1016Zj.habitatint.2012.12.002.
23. Mukhija, V. (2010). Enabling Slum Redevelopment in Mumbai: Policy Paradox in Practice. Housing Studies, 16, 791-806. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673030120090548.
24. Nuryadin, D., Saleh, S., Hardi, A. S., & Pangaribowo, E. H. (2019). Developing a Dynamic Model for Sustainable Development in Yogyakarta City. The Indonesian Journal of Planning and Development, 4(2), 57-68. https://doi.org/10.14710/IJPD.4.2.%P.
25. Peerapun, W. (2012). Participatory Planning in Urban Conservation and Regeneration: A Case Study of Amphawa Community. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 36(June 2011), 243-252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.03.027.
26. Prayitno, B. (2016). Skema Inovatif Penanganan Permukiman Kumuh. Gadja Mada University Press.
27. Ramadhan, R. A., & Pigawati, B. (2014). Pemanfaatan Penginderaan Jauh Untuk Identifikasi Permukiman Kumuh Daerah Penyangga Perkotaan (Studi Kasus : Kecamatan Mranggen Kabupaten Demak). Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning, 1(2), 102-113. https://doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.1.2.102-113.
28. Rohimat, D., Rahmawati, R., & Seran, G. G. (2018). Public Partisipation On Implementation Of KOTAKU/PNPM Program In Ciawi Bogor Municipality. Jurnal Governansi, 3(2), 71. https://doi.org/10.30997/jgs.v3i2.933.
29. Santosa, H., & Astuti, W. (2009). Comprehensive kampung improvement programme to support better settlement and poverty reduction. In CIB Working Commission W110 Informal Settlements and Affordable Housing.
30. Sari, A. C. P., Suman, A., & Kaluge, D. (2018). Implementation Analysis Of Participative Development In National Slum Upgrading Program [ KOTAKU ]. IJEBD (International Journal Of Entrepreneurship And Business Development), 2(1), 17-35. https://jurnal.narotama.ac.id/index.php/ijebd/article/view/646.
31. Septanaya, I. D. M. F., Rahmawati, D., Navitas, P., & Stefanugroho, P. K. (2020). What sets it apart from the rest? Investigating the national slum upgrading program, KOTAKU, in Surabaya. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 562(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/562/1/012031.
32. Sibyan, I. A. (2020). Rethinking Slum Planning : A Comparative Study of Slum Upgrading Projects. Journal of Regional and City Planning, 31(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.5614/jpwk.2020.31.1.1.
33. Singh, K. (2014). Mapping Poverty to Reach the Urban Poor. Social Change, 44(4), 579-
591. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049085714548542.
34. Sobotova, L. (2011). Challenges for Participatory Development in Informal Urban Settlements. Olomuuc Univesity.
35. Sticzay, N., & Koch, L. (2015). GSDR 2015 Brief SLUM UPGRADING. In Wageningen University and Research Centre (Issue c). https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8a39/a9fe5fcf9c0312de9465c2e4dc6cd54ce636.pdf.
36. Sunarti, Esariti, L., & Haulah, L. (2019). Spatial Assessment of Slum Area in Jepara City from Physical and Non-Physical Aspects Perspective. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 313(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/313/1Z012034.
37. Turok, I., & Borel-Saladin, J. (2018). The theory and reality of urban slums: Pathways out of poverty or cul de sacs? Urban Studies, 55(4), 767-789. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098016671109.
38. Uddin, N. (2018). Assessing urban sustainability of slum settlements in Bangladesh: Evidence from Chittagong city. Journal of Urban Management, 7(1), 32-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jum.2018.03.002.
39. UN Habitat. (2016). Sustainable Development Goal 11 Monitoring Framework: A Guide to Assist National and Local Governments to Monitor and Report on SDG goal 11 + Indicators. Earthscan. https://unhabitat.org/sdg- goal-11-monitoring-framework/.
