The Discourse of Relocation the
Capital city of Indonesia: The best solution of solving problems faced by
Jakarta?
A discourse of moving the capital city of Indonesia to
Palangkaraya or to any part of city in Indonesia was a strong issue that has
risen since 2011. The issue is controvesial that makes many Indonesian
people agree and disagree with the issue.
This
essay will discuss several aspects of the discourse of relocating capital city
of Indonesia from both for and against sides. Those who agree with the
discourse of relocating the capital city of Indonesia state three arguments
which are related to do with geography, social, and economy perspectives in which
they belive that the discourse is the best solution for Jakarta.
First,
those who support the relocation of capital city of Indonesia believe that a
capital city should be located in the center of the country. This is in line
with the article from Cabinet Secretariat of Indonesia which quoted: “Ideally,
the state capital is located and protected in an inner circle that is
affordable to defense. Not on the front porch or the back of the territorial
state” (Chaniago, 2013, p.14). This would relate to the accessibility of the
city from all the area in the country. In fact, Jakarta is in the west part of
Indonesia, there has been growing concerns that the development of the
surrounding area that benefited from the capital city would be centered only in
the western part of Indonesia. This is supported by the statement of AndrianofChaniago,
a team member of Indonesian vision 2033 in Tribun news (12 September 2013)
vol.1 who said “With the rapid advancement of Kalimantan, it will become a rung
to advance the East region, which was still left behind. It doesn’t center only
in the western.”A country that has centered its capital city for instance, is
Turkey. In 1923, the capital city of Turkey is moved from Istanbul to Ankara
because geographically Istanbul is in the west part of Turkey (Rawat, 2005). In
addition, to support the government activities, the capital city of course
should save from the distraction of natural distraction. Palangkaraya which is
in Kalimantan, however, is suitable to be a capital city of Indonesia as the
head of BNPB has stated that Kalimantan is an earthquake-free region (Nelis,
2011). It is believed that it can support the government activities in the
future.
The
second reason for those who support the relocation of capital city is related to
do with social perspective. People believe that the biggest challenge which is
being faced by Jakarta is overpopulation. Overpopulation can be simply
described as a situation in which there are too many people like in the city
(Suryadarma, 2012). According to the
data from Jakarta Statistics Center Agency, Jakarta is inhabited by nearly 9.9
million people in 2013. It is shown in the table of population in Jakarta based
on the JSCA below:
Region
|
Years
|
||||
2008
|
2009
|
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
|
Seribu Islands
|
19333
|
19587
|
21082
|
24928
|
22220
|
South Jakarta
|
1748251
|
1894889
|
2062232
|
2134830
|
2148261
|
East Jakarta
|
2195300
|
2623288
|
2693896
|
2925622
|
2801784
|
Center Jakarta
|
813905
|
924679
|
899515
|
1122974
|
908829
|
West Jakarta
|
1635246
|
1635645
|
2281945
|
2259606
|
2395130
|
North Jakarta
|
1201431
|
1422838
|
1645659
|
1715538
|
1715564
|
DKI Jakarta
|
7616838
|
8523157
|
9604329
|
11083498
|
9991788
|
Table 1 is related to do with the
number of population in Jakarta from 2008 to 2012
Source: Jakarta Statistics Center
Agency (2013)
It is
believed that if the government lets Jakarta with the high rate population, the number
of population in Jakarta will be overwhelmed. The overpopulation will lead to
the problem of demography such as traffic congestion, bad ecology,
unemployment, and health risk (Agassi, 2013). In fact, these problems have
occurred in Jakarta nowadays. These problems are hard to solve if the
administrative center of state is still in Jakarta.
Furthermore
in social perspective, it is said that the relocation of the capital city would
build steps to streamline the accelerated development program in eastern
Indonesia, a regional, outer islands and border areas. It creates a sense of
justice among people. As the speaker of House ofRepresentatives has stated that
relocation of capital city also embody a sense of justice and eliminates
discrimination in the level of development among regions as the national
capital to reinforce a sense of one nation (Alie, 2012).
Third,
those who are for side, look at the economic situation. It is believed that the
relocation of the capital city would stop the economic waste caused by
congestion which siphon/take funds tens of millions of dollars every year.By
now, Jakarta is estimated to lose US$3 billion a year because of traffic
congestion(SuaraPembaruan, March 09, 2011). People argu that it would be wiser if the funds
are allocated either for the economic development in remote areas or for the
new infrastructure development. Similarly, Chaniagosaid that congestion is not
possible to be solved through pre-procurement and repair of facilities or by the
methods of advanced engineering techniques.Furthermore, the relocation of the
capital city will create new job opportunities for the citizens around (Rawat,
2005). Apart from economic opportunity
to create new jobs,Chaniago says that the removal will also shift the epicenter
of national development from west to east (Chaniago, 2013). This shift is the
distribution of development efforts which is so far concentrated only in
western Indonesia. Chaniago added, the relocation also builds an effective way
to revive the economic maritime and fisheries which the city of governmentare closer
to the water areas that have great potential in maritime and fishery sectors
(Chinago, 2013).
On
the other hand, those who dislike with the discourse of the relocation of capital
city of Indonesia believe that the discourse is not the best solution for
Jakarta. They
state three arguments which are related to do with environment, economy, and social
and culture perspectives.
First is regarding
the environment perspective.Many people believe that the new big city in Kalimantan
will make change in the environmental situation. It can leads to the Global Warming.
It is supported by the statement of presidential decree which stated that about 45 percent of
broad Kalimantan is for the world’s lung. (Perpres No.03. 2012)
Seconds,
is related to do with economy perspective. There are two parts from this
perspective. First is about the economic growth in Jakarta. As stated in
Ministry of public works site (www.pustaka.pu.go.id) Jakarta has been named as one
of the worth places to visit among many big cities in Asia. Just have a look at
the table below,
Figure 1 is related to do with the number of
International Tourist in Jakarta from 1995 to 2013
Source:
World Bank, World Development Indicators (2013)
The large number of both domestic and international
tourists will increase the income of Jakarta government. It is in line with the
head of the Jakarta tourism agency, ArifBudhiman, which said, “By the increase
in domestic tourists and foreign tourists to Jakarta it will result in
increased cash for the tourism sector in Jakata. in addition, it will also open
up a means for citizens to develop their business.”
Third
is from social and cultural perspective. When Jakarta is moved to Palangkaraya,
it is believed that there will be a change in social and cultural in both Jakarta
and Palangkaraya. Kalimantan, especially in Palangkaraya, there will be an
increase in the number of population and the people will make a society. Since
this, they will create new culture and new norm (Jatnika, P. 2010). This is in
line with the statement of Prasesa who said, “There are some negative things
for the removal of the capital of the island of Borneo, the indigenous people
of Borneo probably mostly the younger generation, they will lose some of their
cultural identity because of assimilation and acculturation as the rapid flow
of people from all over Indonesia, which has a variety of cultural. The nature
of Borneo also will change that previously were mostly dominated forest areas
will be filled by the new towns built for economic reasons and it may threaten
the sustainability of the natural flora or fauna of Borneo as has happened on
the island of Java, since hundreds of years ago.” (Prasesa, A. 2013;1)
In summary,
after looking at the arguments of both side above, I believe that if the
capital city of Indonesia is moved to Palangkaraya, it will solve problems
which are being faced by Jakarta as the explanation mentioned above.
Bibliography and Works Cited
ü Dascher, K.
(2000). Are politics and geography related? Evidence from a cross-section of
capital cities. Public Choice, 105, 373-392.
ü Agassi, E.
(2013). AnalisisFaktor-Fakor yang MempengaruhiPemindahanIbukota Negara. Bogor:
IPB Press.
ü Rawat, R.
(2005). Capital City Relocation: Global-Local Perspectives in The Search For An
Alternative Modernity. Department of Geography York University Toronto, Canada.
ü Resudarmo;
Suryadarma. (2012). “The Effect of Childhood Migration on Human Capital
Accumulation: Evidence from Rural-Urban Migrants in Indonesia”. Australian
Nation University. Retrieved September 2014
ü “Statistik
Indonesia 2012”. Indonesia Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS). Retrieved
September 2014
ü Nelis. (2011). GempaLangkaMengguncang Kalimantan. [online] .
Retrieved from http://dreamindonesia.wordpress.com/2011/09/06/gempa-langka-mengguncan-kalimantan-barat/.
Accessed
on September 20, 2014
ü http://amarullohprasesa.blogspot.com/2013/01/ibu-kota-pindah.html
