Home » Political Ecology of Disasters

Category Archives: Political Ecology of Disasters

Perlengkapan Diri untuk Relawan dan Pekerja Kemanusiaan

Analisa awal situasi pasca gempa-tsunami Sulawesi Tengah 2018 menunjukkan dampak yang luar biasa, termasuk besarnya jumlah korban jiwa, terganggunya infrastruktur, dan kerusakan berat pada bangunan, termasuk perumahan.

Di sisi lain, listrik padam, PDAM tidak berfungsi, SPBU tidak beroperasi, pasokan air minum terganggu, serta tempat tinggal terbatas.

Oleh karena itu, para relawan dan pekerja kemanusiaan perlu menyiapkan kondisi fisik dan mental yang prima untuk menghadapi operasi penanganan darurat bencana pasca gempa-tsunami. Serta, memiliki perbekalan yang cukup agar bisa optimal bekerja.

Dokumen yang perlu dibawa:

☐Kartu Identitas (KTP dan/ atau SIM)
☐Surat tugas
☐Surat keterangan dari dokter (apabila memiliki penyakit kronis, misalnya hipertensi, diabetes, dll)
☐Asuransi kesehatan
☐Kacamata cadangan
☐Uang tunai yang cukup selama masa penugasan
☐Buku dan alat tulis
☐Peta wilayah
☐Daftar nomor telepon penting (Posko, tim di lapangan, dll)
☐Kartu Imunisasi (rekomendasi: tetanus, hepatitis A & B, typhoid, polio)

Peralatan penting untuk dibawa:

☐ Tas ransel
☐ Map plastik tahan air (untuk menyimpan dokumen-dokumen penting)
☐ Baju ganti yang cukup (sesuai dengan kondisi cuaca, disarankan lengan panjang)
☐ Sepatu boot tinggi ber-sol tebal
☐ Topi atau pelindung kepala
☐ Kacamata hitam (anti UV) dan kacamata cadangan
☐ Obat-obatan pribadi (termasuk alat penjernih air)
☐ Losion tabir surya
☐ Penangkal nyamuk/ serangga (wilayah terdampak endemik malaria)
☐ Peralatan mandi dan handuk
☐ Perlengkapan hujan (jas hujan atau jaket)
☐ Perlengkapan pertolongan pertama (untuk perorangan)
☐ Pisau multi-fungsi
☐ Sarung tangan karet
☐ Tissue basah
☐ Hand Sanitizer
☐ Masker N95
☐ Tenda
☐ Handphone, power bank, dan charger
☐ SIM Card dari berbagai jaringan yang sudah diisi dengan pulsa
☐ Senter tahan air dan batere cadangan

Peralatan yang sebaiknya dibawa:

☐ Tas cadangan
☐ Kantong tidur
☐ Handphone cadangan untuk SIM Card lain
☐ Laptop dan charger
☐ USB Memory stick
☐ Alat dokumentasi (kamera atau perekam video)
☐ Kabel sambungan
☐ Radio VHF (Handy Talkie)
☐ GPS

Disusun oleh:
Avianto Amri
Masyarakat Penanggulangan Bencana Indonesia
08552106610

Praktik Konstruksi Developer Lokal di Sikka

Foto di bawah adalah ini adalah contoh bagaimana sebuah developer di Sikka membangun rumah. Untuk memahami makna dari foto ini, anda perlu menanyakan ini pada ahli struktur rumah. Tidak heran bilamana gempa datang, kualitas rumah seperti ini dapat runtuh dengan mudah.

DSC05695a

Document JAL – Suatu tempat di Kota Maumere [Di ambil September 2018]

DSC05697

Foto oleh JAL – Kualitas pengecoran di sebuah tempat yang dibangun oleh developer lokal di Sikka.

Transboundary Water Risk Governance Research of Talau – Loes Riverbasin: Call for PhD Applicant

 

Talau

Talau River [To the left is Timor Leste; to the right is West Timor, Indonesia]

PhD research at Charles Darwin University, Australia – [for potential PhD students from ADS/Endeavour/LPDP/BUDI]  [An Insights from CDU-Undana-UNTL Workshop on Timor Leste and Indonesia Transboundary Watershed Management]

Contact:  Dr. Jonatan A. Lassa [jonatan.lassa@cdu.edu.au] 

[Note Contact me if you are interested!]

Background: A note from the Field

“Twenty five years ago, we used this irrigation channel. But it is now too high for the water to come in. So a few years ago the government of Timor Leste built this new channel.” Said Jose (not a real name) a gentlemen who have been living in Bobonaro since his childhood. Mr Jose is about in his +40s but looks older than his age and he has been witnessing changes in the river flow. The difference of ground elevation between the old and new primary irrigation channel is about +2m [See Picture taken at the bottom].[1]

Standing from the Timor Leste side, we saw the other side of the river – a village in Lamaknen, Indonesia – where we could see gabion structure built to either stabilise the slope or to protect the irrigation channel protection. The two countries with shared border and culture but each would have different solutions to water problems.

Our visit was part of sense making experience of the real world problem – part of the international workshop on Food Security and Integrated Watershed Management at the shared border of Indonesia and Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste Cross-border held in Atambua 25-27 April, 2018.

The field visit allowed us to think about how we link climatic change and risk, water management, food security, droughts and resilience together in the context of the story above? But everybody might agree that to solve water use problem in transboundary settings such as Loes-Talau river basins, it took three countries to sit and talk for sustainable solution. At least 60 people attended the workshops – they come from national ministries, provincial agencies, and universities from Indonesia, Timor Leste and Australia. Disciplinary background of the participants also varies (+20 disciplinary backgrounds).

Interestingly, the workshop, as the first step towards developing a cross-border watershed research and implementation framework – aimed at the following outcomes:

  • Demonstrate political consensus for and begin formal development of a long-term collaborative research and implementation program addressing food security, livelihood and prioritized integrated watershed management issues in the Talau – Loes watershed
  • Identify and agree on core research and knowledge gaps
  • Identify a short-list of prioritized applied research and implementation tasks, and synergies with pro­spective research and funding partners

 Potential PhD Project

The insights from the sense making exercise were beyond natural science interests (e.g. mapping river budget, mapping sediment transports, forest and vegetation covers or flood /drought hazard mappings). The field visit arrangement for one of the groups required diplomatic solution. The result was fantastic as our groups were allowed to cross-border without strict immigration procedures and controls.

One potential agenda can be from interdisciplinary social science (linking political science, International Relation, disaster studies, anthropology and development studies) with a focus on the following topics:

  • Literature review – what types of questions being asked in the previous studies? Systematic review of published work on existing transboundary water governance in other settings: from Central Asia, Mekong River Commission, and Nile River (Ethiopia and Egypt) could be also useful.
  • Potential institutional and governance scenario in the future: What kind of institutional architecture is needed to solve the transboundary water problems (e.g. Dore et. al. 2012) ? [Baseline studies needed: understanding comparative institutional landscape and arrangement between TL/Indonesia on food-water and risk governance. This includes understanding decision making and policy landscape in TL/Indonesia.
  • What are the national interest of Indonesia and Timor Leste in the Transboundary arrangement of Loes-Talau? (e.g. Hirsch et. al. 2006).
  • Understanding conflict and cooperation in transboundary river of Talau – Loes (e.g. Zeitoun and Mirumachi 2008 and Zeitoun et. al. 2011).
  • A historical institutionalism approach to understanding water use in Talau Loes during past and present and the future (e.g. before 1975, during 1975-1999, today and the future)

 

Transdisciplinary vision: Do we need different way of doing research?

There are many problems in the world that could not be solved using single disciplinary lenses. In today’s rising complexity and interdependency of the world, projects on social and policy change are no longer a simple endeavor. Water problem and food insecurity have becoming interdisciplinary problem as their solution required interdisciplinary understanding of realities. The Nicolescu’s 1996 Manifesto of Transdisciplinarity called for ‘‘New Vision of the World’’ with three pillars of transdisciplinarity: complexity, multiple levels of reality or multidimensionality and the logic of the included middle (Klein 2004).

The workshop in Atambua set the stage where policy makers, practitioners and academics can suggests future research questions. There have been productive exchanges between different communities of practice as well as academic. The workshop satisfies the transdisciplinary research criteria because different academic disciplines working jointly with different stakeholders including government officials and NGO practitioners to solve a real-world problem (Klein et. al. 2001).

Conclusion and update!

We need at least one PhD to work on one of the issue above. I am welcoming ADS/Endeavour/LPDP/BUDI applicants who might be interested in the project.

Hopefully we can get one for this.

Reference

Dore, J., Lebel, L. and Molle, F. 2012. A framework for analysing transboundary water governance complexes, illustrated in the Mekong Region. Journal of Hydrology 466–467:23-36.

Hirsch, P Jensen, KM Boer, BW Carrard, NR Fitzgerald, SA Lyster, R. 2006.  National Interests and  Transboundary Water Governance  in the Mekong. Australian Mekong Resource Centre, School of Geosciences, U. of Sydney in collaboration with Danida. http://hdl.handle.net/10453/37620

Klein, J.T., Grossenbacher-Mansuy, W., Häberli, R., Bill, A., Scholz, R.W., and Welti, M.: 2001, Transdisciplinarity: Joint Problem Solving among Science. An Effective Way for Managing Complexity, Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, 332pp.

Klein, J.T.: 2004, Prospects for transdisciplinarity, Futures 36, 515–526.

Paisley, RK. and Henshaw, TW. 2013. Transboundary governance of the Nile River Basin: Past, present and future. Environmental Development 7:59-71.

Zeitoun, M. and Mirumachi, N. 2008. Transboundary water interaction I: reconsidering conflict and cooperation. International Environmental  Agreements. 8:297–316

Zeitoun, M., Mirumachi, N., and Warner,J.  2008 Transboundary water interaction II: the influence of ‘soft’power. International Environmental Agreements. 11(2):159-178.

 

Annex 1. The International Workshop in Atambua

The workshop held by Con­sortium for Sustainable Dryland Agriculture in Atambua on 25-27 April was funded by DFAT Australia via Charles Darwin University.

The dryland consortium was historically initiated by UNDANA-CDU-UNTL with initial funds generously supported by the Indone­sian Ministry of Research, Technology and Higher Education, Universitas Nusa Cendana (UNDANA), Kupang, East Nusa Tenggara Province, established a Con­sortium for Sustainable Dryland Agriculture on behalf of other regional Indo­nesian (Universitas Mataram of West Nusa Tenggara Province, and Universitas Halu Oleo of South East Sulawesi), Universidade Nacional Timor Lorosae of Dili, Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste (DRTL), and Charles Darwin University of Darwin, Australia.

One of the rational of the consortium is to address challenges such as climatic risks that impact food and water security in Timor-Leste, eastern Indonesia, and northern Australia as they all share geographic borders and many issues in common, including major economic and social challenges associated with living in a seasonally arid climate.  Location of Field visit on 26 April 2016 in Tonabibie, Bobonaro, Timor Leste

Detail contacts:

Jonatan Lassa, Ph.D.
Senior Lecturer & Unit Coordinator DEM511, DEM513 & DEM514

Humanitarian, Emergency and Disaster Management Studies
College of Indigenous Futures, Arts and Society
CHARLES DARWIN UNIVERSITY
Building: Yellow 1.2.58, Casuarina Campus 
Darwin, Northern Territory 0909, AUSTRALIA

+61 8 8946 6756| M. +61 466 880 630 | F. +61 8 8946 6712
E mail: 
jonatan.lassa@cdu.edu.au  |  Web: www.cdu.edu.au 

Links to list of publication and cv:
www.indosasters.org 
orcid.org/0000-0002-8432-842X 

 

[1] Based on Google maps, the location of the irrigation channel is slightly on Indonesia side. This is also proven by the constructed benchmark by both GoI and GoTL. Dynamic nature of many transboundary rivers in Timor Island make it difficult to have a fixed boundary from year to year.

Documented Floods in Toineke From 1940s – 2016

Lassa, J. Boli, Y., Nakmofa, Y., Ofong, A., Fanggidae, S. and Leonis, H. 2018. Twenty years of community-based disaster risk reduction experience from a dryland village in Indonesia. Journal of Disaster Studies (JAMBA) Vol xx Issue xx, page xx-xx

Supplemental Table Documented Floods in Toineke From 1940s – 2016.

Flood Timelines Type of event Remarks

[impacts]

1948 Floods Flood inundation – 1 m height – Population was still small
1950 Floods No food problem –population was small
1967 Floods No food problem
13 Dec 1968 Floods Big floods but livestock not affected
1982 Floods Harvest failures as crops damages and swept by flood waters [PRA PMPB 2001]. First road construction and forest logging started in 1982.
1989 Floods Crops damaged and houses flooded [PRA PMPB 2001]. 1989 marked the end of the forest logging as deforestation heavily destroy Aisio Forest.
1999 Floods Secondary hazards such as diarrhoea and cholera occurred [PRA PMPB 2001]
2000 [16 May] Flash floods Some houses collapsed; Almost all houses inundated. Secondary hazards such as diarrhoea and cholera occurred caused 22 death, mostly children [PMPB emergency assessment]
2001 Water inundation Houses inundated, lost crops and livestock
2002 Water inundation Houses inundated, lost crops and livestock
2003 [13 April] Floods Houses were inundated; 150 families evacuated to Aisio Forest, bringing their small livestock.
2004 Floods and water inundation Houses inundated, lost crops and livestock
2008 Floods Houses inundated, damaged crops
31 Dec 2011 Floods 274 households were affected: Houses inundated, damaged crops
2012 [Feb-March] Floods inundation Books in school were swept away
2012 [10-11 Mar] Flood inundation Floods 2 people death. Most houses affected and some damaged [Source: Suara Pembaruan 2012; Tusalakh 2012]
2013 [28 Feb] Floods Houses and crops inundated [Tempo 2013]
2013 [20 June] Floods Houses partially inundated, damaged crops SM and Online Media;

Books in school were swept away; People were evacuated to safe zones [Pos Kupang 2013]

2013 [23 November] Floods “One day rain and Toineke is flooded” Samadara 2013
2016 [28 Feb] Floods Widespread inundation in houses; No car could pass the village temporarily [Nenohai 2016; Boimau 2016; Pos Kupang 2016b]
2016 [12 May] Floods Flood is back and many houses inundated [Pos Kupang 201a]
2016 [26-28 May] Floods Many houses inundated [Pos Kupang 2016]

Source: PMPB 2002, 2007, internal trip reports from Pikul Foundation during 2002-2004, Alamahani and Pelokilla 2010, various media and social media reports.

 

Disaster Governance

Recent use of the term “disaster governance” has been simply meant ‘disaster management’. When i started my PhD on #disastergovernance back in 2007, no one defined what the term really meant. This led me to wrote an entry to an encyclopedia in 2010 [See disaster governance at Sage] as well as my PhD in 2011 [#disastergovernance]

In August 2007, Google hints were only 10 [See picture below] Some of the early documents using this term include UNDP’s Report 2004 [Reducing Disaster Risk, A Challenge for Development] and Dr Thea Hilhorst (Wageningen University). But the earliest should be dedicated to Peter J May. May’s work [see Environmental Management and Governance: Intergovernmental Approaches to Hazards and Sustainability (London and New York: Routledge Press, 1996].

disaster governance

Google Search on Disaster Governance 2007-2010

PhD Tips – Bagaimana merumuskan pertanyaan penelitian?

0b40ecdf9fcaf1ffa436a4f5917eabc0

Bila anda ingin mengambil PhD di negara-negara yang sudah mengalami enlightenment, kerap anda akan dituntut memiliki proposal PhD (S3). Dan salah satu yang akan dilihat adalah bagaimana atau apa pertanyaan penelitian anda!

Sejak sebelum punya mahasiswa bimbingan yang bersifat formal, saya sering ditanyain para junior soal bagaimana sih merumuskan/mencari/mendapatkan pertanyaan riset dalam rangka studi/riset master dan doktoral? Karena sering banget (jujur sudah di atas >20an yang nanya dalam 1 tahun terakir), maka saya putuskan menjelaskan secara ringkas di sini. Hitung-hitung membayar utang pada rekan-rekan di tanah air.

Pertama, anda perlu tau soal pemikiran besar di balik investasi PhD. Tidak seperti yang sering saya lihat di beberapa kasus di tanah air, sebaliknya di Australia, Jerman, UK, US dan Singapore (negara-negara di mana saya bekerja dan menimba ilmu), PhD itu bukan soal sepele dalam kaca mata sistim produksi pengetahuan. Tiap PhD tesis diharapkan melahirkan pengetahuan baru atau setidaknya berkontribusi pada pengetahuan.

Dan tiap mahasiswa PhD harus mampu menemukan celah pengetahuan (knowledge gap) yang perlu diisi. Kadang disebut sebagai ‘research gap’.

Tergantung tingkatan dalam proses pendidikan S3 anda, proses menemukan celah ini bisa saja berbeda-beda tingkat kedalamannya. Bila anda baru berusaha melamar, biasanya supervisor lebih kompromistis dalam hal mengkritisi pertanyaan riset anda. Proposal anda mungkin akan dinilai sebagai sebuah draft awal yang akan ditingkatkan kualitasnya begitu anda lolos hingga tahap seleksi final termasuk jaminan beasiswa. Tetapi bila hingga akhir tahun pertama (atau sebelum ujian konfirmasi – dalam konteks Australia), anda belum juga memiliki pertanyaan riset anda, maka mungkin anda dalam kondisi yang perlu bantuan serius.

Beberapa calon mahasiswa PhD cenderung naif dalam hal ini. Seringkali, yang masih sangat awam dengan riset, cenderung mencoba menyelesaikan masalah yang ada di dalam masyarakat melalui penelitian. Masalah yang dipersoalkan atau yang diproblematisasi cenderung masalah yang dipersepsikan sebagai masalah aktual, penting dan urgen diselesaikan. Hal ini tentu sah-sah saja. Tetapi dalam perspektif akademis, problematisasi ini bisa saja terjadi ketika tidak ada masalah aktual yang urgen tetapi membutuhkan penjelasan sistimatis demi pembelajaran: ‘mengapa tidak ada masalah; atau mengapa masalah-masalah klasik negara bisa diselesaikan oleh negara-negara terntentu?’ Anda bisa saja bertanya mengapa Singapura bisa menjadi negara yang begitu maju dalam banyak sektor yang tidak bisa diprediksikan 50 tahun silam? Dalam hal ini problematisasi dalam spirit akademis bermaksud untuk mempermasalahkan mengapa negara X tidak memiliki masalah A atau B seperti yang terlihat di negara Y dan Z. Jadi problematisasi yang saintifik itu tidak serta merta mensyarakatkan adalah realitas ontologis yang bersifat negatif dalam kondisi rawa paya.

Nah, problematisasi di atas perlu dimatangkan lagi lewat tahap lanjutan. Yakni identifikasi research gap atau knowledge gap.  Sejatinya ini harus didasarkan pada sebuah observasi atas literatur maupun ‘masalah’ yang menjadi ketertarikan anda. Katakanlah ada 100 paper yang pernah dituliskan terkait studi sosial banjir dari berbagai negara. Anda tentu tidak bisa serta merta menyatakan tertarik untuk studi banjir level PhD di kabupaten anda karena sebelumnya belum ada penelitian terkait di kabupaten anda. Yang diperlukan adalah dari 100 paper itu anda perlu lihat pola dari penelitian sebelumnya. Misalkan: pertanyaan yang pernah diajukan, apakah ada kemiripan? Apa pertanyaan yang belum pernah ditanyakan? Dan, apakah metodenya ada persamaan/perbedaan? Yang yang sudah diketahui sejauh ini? Apakah anda mampu menidentifikasikan yang sudah dan belum diketahui? Di mana saja riset-riset sebelumnya dilakukan? Apakah ada bias konteks yang kemudian diambil dan menjadi narasi yang dominan dalam penyelesaian masalah di konteks yang lain yang mungkin saja setting budaya maupun konteks ruang waktu tidak terlalu relevan buat konteks di mana anda berada?

Anda tentu bisa terus bertanya: bagaimana dengan konteks anda saat ini? Bagaimana bila konteks kita bisa digunakan untuk berkontribusi bagi pengetahuan soal banjir? Anda bisa tiba pada pertanyaan terkait model-model pengelolaan (tatakelolah) banjir yang top down versi tunggal pemerintah maupun yang berbasis komunitas, berbasis pasar (insurance and risk transefer) hingga model hybrid (seperti public private partnersip dsb.).

Dan bila anda memang termotivasi belajar soal pengelolaan risiko banjir, apakah anda sudah membaca PhD Thesis si Gilbert White tahun 1945 berjudul Human adjustment to Floods? Studi PhD itu mirip mencoba mengendarai mesin waktu ke masa silam, kembali pada pertama kali topik anda pertama kali dipikirkan orang. Yang ditakuti, adalah pemborosan sumber daya karena anda tidak menambah sedikitpun kontribusi selain tiba pada kesimpulan-kesimpulan karya-karya 100 tahun lalu.

Terasa sulit? Mungkin saja. Tetapi dengan terus melatih diri, anda sangat mungkin tiba pada titik di mana pertanyaan penelitian anda menjadi lebih tajam. Dan di titik ini anda bisa melihat potensi di mana riset anda bisa berkontribusi pada pengetahuan global soal masalah yang anda hadapi dalam konteks lokal anda. Ini tentu di kenal dengan universalisasi dari pengetahuan yang diproduksi oleh anda.

Ilustralisi yang tepat mungkin seperti ini: Anda datang ke sebuah wilayah jelajah yang baru anda temui di sebuah pulau baru yang tidak anda kenal. Dua pilihan untuk anda: Pertama, anda bisa bertidak seperti orang Eropa ketika datang ke Benua Amerika atau Australia. Misi ekspansif anda membuat anda berpikir andalah orang pertama yang tiba di benua tersebut. Tak peduli sudah 50-80 ribu tahun ada penduduk asli, anda dengan seenaknya mengklaim soal “temuan baru” anda. Tetapi ada pilihan ke dua bagi anda: Begitu anda menginjakan kaki di benua baru, anda perlu tanyakan secara lebih jujur: apakah sudah ada orang yang menginjakan kaki mereka sebelumnya di tempat ini/itu? Bila ya, coba observasi dan petakan wilayah mereka sambil buat ancang-ancang yang lebih manusiawi: kira-kira posisi anda berada di mana? Apakah anda sekedar berdiri di atas tapak yang sudah dibangun orang lain? Ataukan anda harus membuat koloni baru yang tidak serta merta sebuah wilayah rampasan (baca: plagiat).

Semoga menolong untuk sementara.

[Bersambung di lain waktu]

J.A.L.

 

 

A critical reflection on “running to higher ground” narrative!  Myth and Reality in Tsunami Warning and Response

 

Screen Shot 2017-08-20 at 9.31.39 PM

This paper provides critical reflection on the transferability of local knowledge adoption to foreign lands and peoples. It also challenges the universal construction of and acceptance of “going to the higher ground” as means to save lives to avoid the tsunamis hitting the shore. Scientists and practitioners of tsunami preparedness and disaster management often promote the idea of “running to the higher ground” when physical and biological indicator of tsunami appears at beaches. Many peer-reviewed and grey literatures have discussed about the role of local knowledge (LK) of indigenous tsunami warning system that saved lives across the Indian Ocean from Simelue Island of Aceh. In Simelue Island, ‘only’ seven lives were lost as the people went to higher ground.

This research argues that the indigenous Smong (tsunamis) warning systems informed by TK in Semelue Island could still save the lives of the people in the island in future tsunami events. However, a critical analysis of the real merit of the LK in the context of Simelue Island needs to be made in order to be meaningful for the locals to deal with future tsunami risks. Informed by the recent findings from East Flores where several people who evacuated themselves to the nearby hills got killed and got buried by landslides as they soon after the 1992 Flores Earthquakes, this paper challenges the universal belief that “running to the higher ground” could save lives.