Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia Trias Aditya, Iwan Gunawan Suryani Amin, Hoferdy Zawani, Ruby Mangunsong Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia Trias Aditya, Iwan Gunawan Suryani Amin, Hoferdy Zawani, Ruby Mangunsong The World Bank Office Jakarta Jakarta Stock Exchange Building, Tower II/12-13th Fl. Jl. Jend. Sudirman Kav. 52-53 Jakarta 12190, Indonesia This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. ISBN 978-979-16876-9-0 Authors: Trias Aditya Iwan Gunawan Hoferdy Zawani Suryani Amin Ruby Mangunsong Acknowledgements We would like to thank BPBD Sleman, Bappeda Sleman, Bappeda Yogyakarta, Bappeda Balikpapan, Sleman Land Office (BPN), Yogyakarta Land Office (BPN), and Balikpapan Land Office (BPN) for their great partnerships and their supporting technical data. We also would like to thank surveying and mapping teams of Merapi, Winongo, and Ampal studies for their helps. Finally, we would like to thank Prof. Dr. Budi Mulyanto, M.Sc for his valuable inputs. Photo Credit: Trias Aditya Design & layout: Indra Irnawan, Adhi Wibowo May 2017 PREFACE The purpose of this technical note on collaborative mapping is to serve as a reference and guidance in applying collaborative mapping approach to support the land governance and detailed spatial planning. Surveying and mapping activities are indispensable activities to provide detailed geospatial information as a good foundation to develop diagnostics and problem solving alternatives in multi-faceted urban development that deals with disaster management, slum and poverty eradication. The strategies and techniques for coordinated data compilation, validation and improvements involving government officers and community representatives through collaborative mapping are presented in three different case studies in post Merapi eruption rehabilitation, Winongo and Ampal river area redevelopment. Those three case studies represent their own environmental problems due to either natural disaster (e.g., in case of Merapi) or climate driven flood inundation. The maps and geospatial information produced are seen as unified base canvases for supporting detailed spatial planning. The provision and quality evaluation of base maps in collaborative mapping process are fundamental for accelerating geospatial data compilation and validation through participatory interaction. The information derived can contribute towards integrated and comprehensive spatial planning, disaster management, urban and rural land governance and development at site and local level. We hope that this technical note can be used as technical reference to many on-going national initiatives toward one map policy implementation. We would like to thank our local and national partners in Merapi area, Winongo and Ampal Riverbank during the implementation of pilot projects, the showcases reported in this technical note. Authors, May, 2017 Content I. Context........................................................................................................................................................................1 I.1. Definition.........................................................................................................................................................1 I.2. Rationale.........................................................................................................................................................1 I.3. Drivers..............................................................................................................................................................3 I.4. Gap....................................................................................................................................................................3 I.5. Reasonable Deliverables.........................................................................................................................4 II. Method.......................................................................................................................................................................9 II. 1. Approach......................................................................................................................................................9 II. 2. 1. Preliminary Survey................................................................................................................. 10 II. 2. 2. Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Mapping When Necessary ............................. 11 II. 2. 3. Field Survey .............................................................................................................................. 11 II. 3. Cross agencies Data Collection and Compilation.................................................................... 11 II. 4. Participatory Mapping......................................................................................................................... 11 II. 5. Cartographic Work and Spatial Analysis ..................................................................................... 12 III. Base Map Options............................................................................................................................................. 13 IV. Case Studies....................................................................................................................................................... 15 IV. 1. Mount Merapi post-disaster recovery.......................................................................................... 15 IV. 2. Risk-Sensitive Urban Planning of Winongo River, Yogyakarta, Indonesia...................24 IV. 3. Risk-Sensitive Urban Planning of Ampal River, Balikpapan...............................................30 V. Utilization of Collaborative Mapping Projects........................................................................................37 V. 1. Land Consolidation in Mount Merapi’s Post Disaster Recovery........................................37 V. 2. Spatial Decision-Support in Risk-Sensitive Urban Development .....................................39 V. 2. 1. Calculating Building Density............................................................................................... 41 V. 2. 2. Calculating Imaginary Demarcation Lines on Riverside Areas...........................42 V. 2. 3. Identifying the Location of Waste Water Treatment Infrastructures.................45 V. 2. 4. Identifying Where to Put Hydrant ...................................................................................46 V. 2. 5. Calculting Best Evacuation Routes................................................................................. 47 V. 2. 6. Identifying Land Ownership...............................................................................................48 VI. Lesson Learned.................................................................................................................................................50 VI.1. Advantages...............................................................................................................................................50 VI. 1. 1. Efficient Way to Gather Good Quality Data.................................................................50 VI. 1. 2. Strengthening Spatial Awareness..................................................................................50 VI. 1. 3. Extending Possibilities and Outreach...........................................................................50 VI. 2. Real Challenges.................................................................................................................................... 51 References.................................................................................................................................................................52 Abbreviations & Accronyms...............................................................................................................................53 List of Figure Figure 1. A sequence of activities done in collaborative mapping process............................ 2 Figure 2. Collaborative mapping framework: the mapping processes and the product connects the trigger and the gap to provide requirements for effective and efficient disaster risk and climate change management................. 3 Figure 3. General flow of the processes............................................................................................... 8 Figure 4. GPS survey activity...................................................................................................................10 Figure 5. Participatory mapping workshops for validating and updating geometry and data attributes....................................................................................................................12 Figure 6. Rationale for conducting Merapi Detailed Risk Zone Mapping.............................16 Figure 7. Footprints of Merapi lava flow..............................................................................................16 Figure 8 Stages in collaborative mapping in post merapi eruption........................................ 17 Figure 9 Field validation activities.........................................................................................................18 Figure 10 Participatory mapping to validate the draft of maps at hamlet level....................19 Figure 11 Existing data available ............................................................................................................21 Figure 12 Sample of resulted detailed risk map...............................................................................22 Figure 13 The new settlement houses located in safer areas.....................................................23 Figure 14 Rationale for Winongo Disaster Risk and Climate Change Mapping...................24 Figure 15 Steps undertaken and parties involved in the mapping processes......................25 Figure 16 Mosaic orthophoto and DSM derived from UAV imagery........................................27 Figure 17 DSM (top left), Contour map (top right), Cross sections produced in the project (bottom).........................................................................................................................28 Figure 18 Land parcels with the legal status are differentiated with different hues, the red one indicates blocks traditionally registered as the Sultanate Ground .....................................................................................................................28 Figure 19 Some spatial analyses produced from the project......................................................29 Figure 21 Rationale for Ampal Collaborative Mapping Project..................................................30 Figure 20 Condition of Ampal River riverbank that experiences rapid development........30 Figure 22 One of collaborative mapping product on Flood and Landslide susceptibility ...............................................................................................................................33 Figure 23 Steps undertaken and parties involved in collaborative mapping process.......34 Figure 24 Flood prone areas map...........................................................................................................36 Figure 25 The resulted collaborative map of Pangukrejo, Umbulharjo...................................38 Figure 26 Using the resulted collaborative map (top), land parcels were identified and their boundaries were designed producing parcel-based block plan design in land consolidation project..................................................................................39 Figure 27 Flood inundation nearby the Ampal riverbank is frequent experience for local residents especially when heavy rain shower the city more than two hours......................................................................................................................................40 Figure 28 The green aggregated parcel blocks were identified as parcels potential to be included in land consolidation project to support city infrastructure improvement ..............................................................................................................................40 Figure 29 Density buidling heatmap of Segment 1 and 2 (left) as well as 3 and 4 (right) of Winongo River..........................................................................................................41 Figure 30 The demarcation lines of 15 meters right and left from the edge of the river on segment 1 and 2 (left) as well as 3 and 4 (right)..................................42 Figure 31 Buildings that virtually are fully within or partially within the 15 m of riverbanks zone ....................................................................................................................43 Figure 32 Land parcels (with various riights i.e. use rights/HP, private ownerships/HM, building use rights/HGB) that virtually are fully within or partially within (i.e. intersect) the 15 m of riverbanks zone ................. 44 Figure 33 The proposed location of IPAL to be installed in Segment 5 and 6 (left) as well as 7 and 8 (right) based on their access and the topography..................45 Figure 34 Proposed community hydrant installation in segment 1 and 2 (left) as well as 3 and 4 (right).........................................................................................................46 Figure 35 Best evacuation routes for Segments 1 and 2 (left) as well as 3 and 4 (right)..............................................................................................................................................47 Figure 36 Flood extent and threatened houses ...............................................................................48 Figure 37 Land ownership situation in Winongo river....................................................................49 List of Table Table 3.1 The scale of maps and its practical use............................................................................13 Table 3.2 Types of data sources for producing base layer in collaborative mapping........14 Table Numbers of buildings that are fully or partially selected in case of urban arrangement based upon riverside zonation (15 m.......................................43 Table. Composition of land tenureships based on their right types in the study area.....................................................................................................................................49 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia “Collaborative mapping creates a unified agreed- upon local basic and thematic maps usable to support planning and disaster management” 1 I. Context The chapter provides an introduction to the concept of collaborative mapping and justification on how the approach could be used to respond to the need for detailed geospatial data for planning and problem solving. The chapter elaborates the framework and sequencial process to come up with a solution. I.1. Definition on the design, process, and methods in utilizing geospatial data and explotatory tools as well Collaborative mapping denotes the process in as structured discussions in a community to producing a reference local map presenting basic produce spatial planning and problem solving as and thematic geospatial information that were well as decision making (Balram and Dragicevic acquired and compiled through joint survey and 2008). Collaborative mapping here is seen as an mapping activities involving local government, advancement of participatory mapping design and community and relevant stakeholders. The processes in order to ensure the acceptace and use collaborative processes encompass a series of joint of community maps into actions. data acquisition and compilation, synchronization, verification and presentation using corrected aerial imageries or high resolution satellite imageries as I.2. Rationale the base images. Collaborative mapping’s area The lack of detailed spatial data required for of interest may start from the smallest unit area supporting spatial plan and disaster responses (e.g. neighbourhood areas) to larger area (e.g., hinders quick and accurate responses. Yet, many block, corridor, or village) in a district or city blocks. data acquisition and compilation initiatives can Collaborative mapping processes may involve easily be found across the agencies, especially heterogeneous data (in the same level of detail) , after a disaster event, on which the data various organizations, different perspectives, but accessibility and its quality differ from one agency the product should be used as a single reference for to another agency. It has always been a challenging all parties, yet must comply with geometry quality task to deal with heterogeneity of the data and their requirements set out by the national mapping quality, avoiding possibilities for data sharing and agency. the joint use of the data. This can be exemplified in many disaster events. Right after the disaster The notion of collaborative mapping here should strikes, disaster responders and managers had be differentiated with participatory mapping. difficulties to find and access detailed map including Participatory mapping emerges as a tool to provide impacted areas, elevation data and detailed map convenient ways for community members to engage depicting exposure information such as buildings, and participapte in planning or decision-making infrastructures, land uses. These detailed map and processes (see Aditya 2010). Kryger (2002) specified other spatially referenced information are needed that participatory mapping utilizes a wide range by disaster responders and managers to support of graphics visualization to encourage community their plans and needs for coordination in the phase participation in expressing spatially referenced views of disaster responses, relief and reconstruction. and deliberation (Rinner 2001, Cai and Yu 2009). In case that the access is not a problem, the data While participatory mapping focuses on methods might be available partially from one agency but and processes in producing community-based maps might not be relevant to be integrated with other (Craig and Elwood 1998, Sieber 2006, Chambers specific data from another agency because of the 2006, Elwood 2006), collaborative mapping here different level of detail. focuses on methods and processes to facilitate integration of government and community maps The provision of a basic map seen as a base through field verification, structured discussions canvas in collaborative map production is crucial. involving community members and government An agreed and unified base map is the key asset to agencies. enable detailed thematic information integration. In that way, critical issues to city/district development The scientific foundation for Collaborative mapping such as flood risk mapping and slum mapping can closely related to Collabortive GIS which centered be draped into and analysed accordingly. 2 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia That prerequisite map is important to be available at The collaborative approach that follows this track of a city level in order to ensure that community-based actions has been proven to be effective and efficient spatial plan and government plan are using the in answering the need for a single reference map same base map. As a such, the collaborative map to be used for planning and development in post canvas mashes up community and field data with Merapi eruptions. The activities were done in 4 local government /technical agencies data, enabling months in total and the result is then used by local one map policy at local level (top-down and bottom- agencies, village officers, land office to support up data integration). The product of a collaborative many planning and development activities, including mapping activity can then be used to support land recertification for burnt areas. Collaborative response and development program such as detail maps that were produced were checked by both spatial planning, disaster risk planning, and land community representatives and local government/ development. The application of collaborative officers. Community representatives who inherit map represents in this book is focused on the local knowledge contribute to data acquisition and preparation of a detailed plan layout with oriented verification through multiple participatory mapping to, among others, the disaster risk reduction. sessions (see more in Chapter IV). Figure 1 depicts a sequence of activities executed Local managers/officers who own underlying in the collaborative mapping process. The activities data and information contribute to the provision involve various stakeholders including the local of secondary data and participate in the data disaster office, the local planning office, village verification activity. Collaborative maps are the officers, a community group of settlement planning, outcome of the integration of top-down and bottom- starting from data acquisition till validation. In each up approaches. It offers more trusted and accurate stages (acquisition-synchronization-verification- map representations than just participatory maps. dissemination), discussions and inputs are It creates a new information value attached to the annotated to geospatial features seen on the map, collaborative map which can be seen as a joint enabling the working map as a proxy to facilitate effort accomplished by various agencies and groups government-community communication and map in establishing a formalized geospatial information updating. reference to support city/district developments. Figure 1. A sequence of activities done in collaborative mapping process 3 I.3. Drivers I.4. Gap Local government is often required to provide Poor detailed geospatial data availability and appropriate and accurate spatial plans either in data management (e.g., low data availability, data response to disaster events or in support of city with varied quality, managed by different users, redevelopment. Unfortunately, as found in many not ready for spatial adjustment, lack capacity on cities and districts, those spatial plans are difficult spatial data management) cause local government to be gained as different data quality from various and community fail to deliver appropriate and agencies exist. Using existing practices and accurate responses and planning. For example, protocols, the data compilation and synchronization before Winongo collaborative map is available, will take place very slowly. In addition, the basic the province and local governments of Yogyakarta map and thematic information are either not had difficulties to calculate which and how many accessible or available. Yet, they have not been land parcels and buildings that will be affected by validated by community and relevant stakeholders. riverbank readjustment when the project is done. For that reason, in order to produce validated maps and information, government maps and community- based mapping needs to be integrated. This is where collaborative mapping offers a solution to fulfil the gap, as illustrated in Figure 2. Figure 2 Collaborative mapping framework: the mapping processes and the product connects the trigger and the gap to provide requirements for effective and efficient disaster risk and climate change management TRIGGER GAP REQUIREMENTS No detailed, accessible Spatial rezonation for Maps showing actual and suitable map is directly impacted flood condition related to existing available to and slum prone areas has physical environments facilitate spatial to be done immediately including built- areas, rezonation infrastructures & hazards SOLUTION Collaborative Mapping offers a solution that fill the gap 4 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia I.5. Reasonable Deliverables C. It supports the implementation of National One Map Policy (Single Reference, Database and System) at a city level, thus turning OMP into Some deliverables that can be produced from actions in support of local government. conducting collaborative mapping activities include: As the local government shows high A. Local government recognizes unified, agreed- commitment, the collaborative map fulfils upon geospatial datasets suited to planning and the demand for data access and data uses disaster management theme in a specified area. mandated by the Presidential Regulation No. Local government must be encouraged to 9/2016 about Acceleration on Implementation of take actions to use and endorse uses of good One Map Policy at Scale 1:50,000. Indonesia’s quality of geospatial data as a unified and One Map Policy is an effort to establish a formal resource in dealing with multipurpose unified, agreed-upon geospatial dataset (e.g., city planning and development problems. The land use, land tenure, disaster areas) that verification and involvement of national mapping informs decision making at the sub-national agency, in case the basic imagery is not with levels. A unified, agreed-upon set of thematic them, in quality assurance is crucial to justify geospatial datasets could benefit Indonesia the appropriateness of the imageries used in in many ways. By increasing integration and collaborative map. synchronization of geospatial boundaries and areas across themes, it would help avoid unnecessary overlapping claims, reducing B. It helps the government to realize development conflicts and inconsistencies. This is the first plans, to better address poverty, and to reduce step toward the creation of a unified basic map disaster vulnerability. of state lands, at least at scale 1:50,000, which Government has been troubled with currently not available. Critical to the One Map implementing development plans due to low efforts is to operationalize the data sharing quality of spatial datasets and management. mechanism that promotes (as much as is One map would help them reduce geographical possible) transparency, consistency, information uncertainty leading to increasing transparency sharing, and accountability. Acceleration to for investments, better program aligning, the provision of both basic map and thematic well targeting of beneficiaries and helping for information that suited to on map policy thus effective program’s monitoring and evaluation. becomes inevitable. Collaborative mapping support One Map Policy efforts by creating a unified agreed-upon local basic and thematic map (larger scale map than 1:50,000), usable to support sub-district and village-based spatial planning and disaster management. 5 What is collaborative mapping activity? Collaboration is a joint activity that involves multi parties in a mutual working group that involves task sharing and synchronization that aims to achieve an ultimate goal. In participation ladder perspective, collaboration is an activity that is one step ahead from coordination and two steps ahead from cooperation. Collaborative mapping in this case study is a kind of mash up that combine various resources into one final product which is agreed map on disaster zone, sub village boundary, and buildings for spatial planning purposes. What to collaborate? Here is example from Merapi Collaborative mapping in 2013: Data: Aerial photos, satellite imageries, GIS data, community spatial plans Tools: GPS/GNSS geodetic type for accurate positioning, GIS software (QGIS), and Mobile GPS Methods: Scientific data processing and participatory mapping/planning Stakeholders: BPBD DIY/Yogyakarta Provincial Disaster Management Agency (coordinator), BPPTKG/Research and Technology Development of Geological Disaster, BIG/Geospatial Information Agency, Bappeda Sleman/ Sleman District Development Planning Agency, BPBD Sleman/Sleman District Disaster Management Agency, DPPD Sleman/Sleman District land Control Department, BPN Sleman/Sleman District Land Office, PU ESDM DIY/Yogyakarta Provincial Public Works, Energy and Natural Resources Agency, Bappeda DIY/Yogyakarta Provincial Development Planning Agency, Balai Besar Serayu Opak/Serayu Opak River Basin Development Agency, Government of Umbulharjo, Kepuharjo, Glagaharjo villages of Cangkringan sub-district, REKOMPAK/Community-based Settlement Rehabilitation and Reconstruction, and university researchers 6 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia One Map Policy at a Glance The One Map Policy term has been known since 2011 but the action has been slow. There is a new momentum following the July 2014 election of President Joko Widodo. One Map was first introduced under the President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono Administration and was included in the Law on Geospatial Information (Law No. 4/2011). President Joko Widodo identified One Map Policy as a priority after taking office and re-confirmed his commitment as part of his CoP21 speech. In February 2016, the President issued a Presidential Regulation (9/2016) mandating acceleration of the implementation of One Map Policy at 1:50,000 of scale. Although not directly usable for collaborative mapping and detailed mapping at local level, this policy has been very positive to accelerate to the notion of one data for one development purpose. A working group lead by the Coordinating Ministry of Economics has been defining the scope of work for accelerating One Map Policy implementation that includes: • Compilation of thematic data collected from agencies and local governments, • Verification of data for data integration • Synchronization within integrated data The Geospatial Information Agency (BIG) chairs the Implementation Team, facilitating reconciliation upon conflicting data that requires cross-agency coordination. Coordination means collecting base maps and networks of survey control point and integrating thematic land information from various sources. Currently the Ministries of Energy and Mineral Resources, Environment and Forestry, Agriculture, Marine and Fisheries, Public Works and Housing, and Transportation, as well as the National Land Agencies all have authority to make sectoral maps. Under One Map, these agencies will continue to produce, maintain and update their respective datasets, but will make them accessible through a geoportal managed by BIG. 7 Objectives permits from transportation agency). The process to create the map can be divided into two main work, It mainly aims at producing a single yet unified technical work and non-technical work. Technical detailed map representing basic layers of the city/ work covers the development of orthorectified district (existing buildings and settlement areas, imageries (when the data has not been vertically transportation features, water and hydrographic corrected), raster to vector data conversion, and features, administrative and local areas e.g. across agencies’ data integration. Non-technical neighborhood area borders) plus focused thematic work include: engagement with local partners information depicting topic of interest including (government, local experts, and community), multi- disaster management, slum alleviation, land stakeholders dialogue, and multi-stakeholders’ development and city planning. The project activity verification and agreed upon. The general flow, is therefore enabling a collaborative platform within how the technical and non-technical work evolve in the city by which local governments and community the activity can be seen in Figure 3. representatives develop a large-scale risk mapping. The resulting map feeds into Neighbourhood Development Planning to increase resiliency towards The flow of processes can be summarized as a disaster and climate change. The maps should be follow: easy to use and updated by local governments. a. It starts with coordination and engagement with the local government and local partners. Engagement with local governments, local experts and community must be done before Process and Activities the project was really started. The collaborative map comprises of basic map and b. It must facilitate multi-stakholders’ dialogue thematic layers that are produced from digital high for data acquisition, compilation, verification resolution imageries. The source of imageries can and forum to resolve disputes over data be from aerial photographs, satellite imageries, or representation and quality. UAV (Unmanned Aerial Vehicle) images. The use of UAV is limited to some extent, mainly because c. It must integrate various data into a spatially the requirements to comply with national standard referenced platfrom admissible for planning is considered uneasy (e.g. extensive uses of high and development purposes. accuracy Ground Control Points (GCPs), additional terrestrial height survey to improve z values, 8 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia Figure 3 General flow of the processes Kick off meeting & Engagement Data collection from various stakeholders (local government & community data) Preliminary Survey with Mobile GPS Data integration into the work map Preparation of high-resolution imageries as the work map Place name, geometry, attribute verification Validation and field check regarding: disaster impacted area, Participatory mapping workshop climate change impacted objects, planning zones, and the planning implementation done by local Joint survey with using GPS/GNSS agencies and validated by community against Boundaries and ffected Areas representatives Expert & stakeholders meeting Database development and map presentation Final verification Map dissemination 9 II. Method The chapter presents required survey and mapping activities including participatory mapping activities for producing collaborative maps. One of essential items to be assessed is the availability of aerial imageries to be used as a base imagery to plot and combine multi theme geospatial data matches with community participatory data. e. It provides reliable yet simple methods for II. 1. Approach handling multiple data gained from different The keywords for the approaches undertaken in parties with various quality and levels of the collaborative mapping approach are: unified details (e.g. coordinate transformation, rubber and validated large-scale map for planning and sheet processes, map adjustments, and data development, integrating top-down and bottom-up selection and integration). data, compliance to national map standard. In order f. It provides spatial analysis for real world to produce an agreed and reliable collaborative problems found in the field (e.g. detailed map, the following activity should be undertaken. information on houses will be impacted directly a. The activity establishes a geometrically correct by lahar, houses and land parcels within the and thematically validated large scale map (at building-free river embankment zones) that is scale 1:2,500 or 1:5,000) produced from an useful to give insights to decision makers to orthorectified high resolution imagery to help plan scenarios for solutions. mainstreaming disaster risk management into The key challenge is to provide aerial imageries that development decisions. Given the relatively meet requirements to be used as the base layer for small area, this practice requires intensive detailed maps (scale 1:5,000 or larger). Currently, collaboration from related stakeholders to agree aerial imageries that are feasible to be used as the on method of data compilation, validation, base layer must be orthorectified imageries which improvement. means the imageries have been corrected from b. It formulates thematic information outputs where errors due to topography variation and due to images the quality of its underlying basic map (at scale distortion. The aerial imageries can be produced 1:2,500 or 1:5,000) are in compliance with from very high resolution satellite imageries (e.g. National Map Standard and Guidelines, thus having pixel size equals to 51 centimeters) or aerial adding more confidences to local government photographs taken from (UAV) or aerial plane. and stakeholders to accept the map as the The methods can be broken into sub activities of reference for follow-up disaster management spatial data collection, processing, validation and and planning activities. analysis. Technically the method include preparing c. It employs local engineers and technician, orthorectified imageries, doing field verification preferably with GIS and geomatics engineering survey, cross agencies data collection and background, who have knowledge and compilation, participatory mapping, and cartographic experiences in working with community and in work and analysis. facilitating the mapping processes, including in facilitating validation and participatory mapping II. 2. Preparation of Orthorectified sessions. Imageries d. It accommodates community participation In case satellite imageries have been orthorectified in populating thematic data and in validating (e.g., by BIG), then the imagery can be used as government data, enabling top-down and a canvas layer to enable data integration and bottom-up. verification. In case the imageries have been from aerial photographs, it should be assumed that the imageries have been geometrically corrected. 10 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia Geometrically corrected here means: their city/district areas is to contact the national mapping agency about this. Further when the data a. The imagery has been adjusted to local is available, a formal request should be submitted to horizontal position using highly accurate GCPs, BIG to get the data. measured using Geodetic GPS. The number of GCPs depends on the city/district area to be Orthorectified imageries must facilitate multi- surveyed. For instance, a city that are covered stakholders’ dialogue for data acquisition, by 2 scenes of high resolution satellite imageries compilation, verification and forum to resolve (e.g., 1 scene: 16 km x 16 km) require 20-30 disputes over data representation and quality. See points of GCPs for a scene, depending on the also Base map options terrain (topography surface) of the area. b. The set of imageries must then be tied into DEM II. 2. 1. Preliminary Survey (Digital Elevation Model) of the city/district area to remove earth curvature effect and to improve Preliminary survey are needed to check whether coordinate accuracy. This process can be the coordinates are correctly calculated. Further, achieved using Remote Sensing/GIS software the images radiometric quality should be checked utilizing rigorous orthorectification approach. in order to make sure the imageries can be used as the canvas for participatory mapping activities. The easiest way for local agencies to know whether Preliminary survey also include delineation of the high resolution imageries are available for neighborhood and villages’ boundary together with village officers. Joint Accurate GPS / GNSS Survey Joint GPS/GNSS survey sessions were executed to produce validated sub village (dusun) boundaries and validated ATL boundaries. GPS Surveys for sub village boundaries updating were done by local government officers and village officers and sub village leaders. ATL boundaries validation activities were done together lead by BPPTKG and followed by BPBD DIY, BPBD Sleman, village officers and sub village leaders. GPS researchers and assistants were acted as facilitator/GPS operator and analysis. All GPS surveys were documented using standard forms conveying detail implementation and signatures from representatives of stakeholders involved in the survey activities. Figure 4 GPS Survey Activity 11 II. 2. 2. Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle II. 3. Cross agencies data collection Mapping when necessary and compilation UAV can be used to cover missing areas or to cover In order to collect all existing data regarding basic small areas (e.g. less than 1000 ha) where required layers (administrative boundaries, buildings, land imageries are not available or they are available uses, infrastructures) and disaster related zones but with bad quality (e.g. clouds cover). It can be (impacted areas, hazard prone areas zonation, used with maximum concerns (e.g. must comply planning zonation) from stakeholders in the city of with transportation agency and telecommunication Yogyakarta, a series of institutional visit to technical agency permit requirements). When it is done, field agencies is required. GCPs and additional field surveys especially for surveying terrain values are strictly required. The visit is intended to collect all available yet related data in the project area. Later, the collected UAV flight mission must be designed properly in data are compiled and then plotted into the order to produce good quality aerial imageries orthorectified imageries used as the base canvas. covering the project area. Flight height of UAV must be in compliance with Ministry of Transportation II. 4. Participatory mapping Regulation (specified in the regulation of Ministry of Participatory mapping is required to verify Transportation No. 90/2015). In this regulation, it is government spatial data and to collect views and specified that when the UAV’s flight height is above aspiration of community members in forms of maps. 150 meters, the flight mission must be done under In applying participatory mapping, the government the government’s permission. can involve actively as facilitators or participants. In GCPs must be installed on the field before the flight practice, participatory mapping can be utilized: mission starts to control the resulted photographs. a. To facilitate community groups to validate GCPs should be distributed in good numbers and geographic features, administrative boundaries of must be surveyed using Geodetic GPS devices. aerial imageries; UAV is equipped with high digital camera resolution b. To facilitate community inputs regarding hazards, to produce aerial photos and with GPS sensor to problems and proposed development; ease the flight control. In recent development of c. To convert community maps from community UAV devices, the camera can also be equipped mapping activities as spatial features plotted on with post processing kinematic GPS (PPK GPS) to top of the referenced aerial photos. enable better accuracy of UAV imageries. Participatory mapping can be done either through participatory mapping workshop or through II. 2. 3. Field survey joint field validation. In a participatory mapping Field survey is needed to gather information on workshop, a facilitator should provide guidelines administrative boundaries and to collect additional and directions to make communication and data. Administrative boundaries and neighborhood coordination among participants can be effective boundaries are surveyed together with community and efficient, producing an accurate and complete representatives and local government officers. participatory map (Aditya 2010). Participatory maps through photo maps were considered as the most Field survey is necessary in order to check effective means for community members to engage the produced imageries and to make sure that and produce maps. orthorectified imageries can be used as the reference background for collaborative mapping Additional data collection sometimes is necessary. For example additional topographic survey especially using Total Station survey instrument to validate the riverbank profile. 12 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia II. 5. Cartographic work and spatial c. To develop spatial analysis to investigate population density, building density, settlement analysis infrastructure suitability, and disaster Cartographic work and spatial analysis are required to be infrastructure needs in the project areas; done using Geographic Information System software. The work includes data compilation of secondary data and d. To visualize the results in forms of maps; georeferencing work, rubber sheeting as well as bound- The result of cartographic work and spatial analysis ary adjustment of multi theme geospatial data. For this is subject to be discussed and improved. For this purpose, orthorectified imageries can be seen as the ref- purposes, a focus group discussion is necessary. erence data. The complete cartographic work and spatial analysis may include the task: The discussion can be focused: a. To digitize spatial features of building and public a. To discuss with the expert on the infrastructures as vector data; recommendation based on the field activities; b. To symbolize detailed data on transportation, b. To conduct a mapping workshop at the end of the settlement infrastructure, land parcels effectively program; for visual communication purposes; c. To develop standards and protocols for conducting joint survey involving stakeholders and community. Participatory Mapping Workshops Participatory Mapping workshops were done involving sub village leaders, vilage officers, local government officers in order to : Validate and update the geometry of geospatial features of houses and buildings, roads, sub village boundaries and directly impaced areas (ATL) zones Validate and enrich geospatial attributes of buildings and houses in 3 villages including building construction parameters, building use, clean water source, electricty,name of house hold leaders. Figure 5. Participatory mapping workshops for validating and updating geometry and data attributes attributes 13 III. Base Map Options As stated earlier, one of motivating objectives imageries must have been orthorectified. It means for going with collaborative approaches is that that coordinates of the imageries must have been the availability of basic geospatial data (e.g. corrected against the ground control points and geospatially referenced data layers) is poor, have been adjusted into digital elevation model of especially the availability of large-scale maps the mapping area. suitable to support local planning and disaster mitigation. Large scale maps, e.g. maps with scale The lack of basic maps and satellite imageries 1:2,500 and 1:5,000 are essential to support local has pushed many local government initiate spatial plan or to develop detailed contingency own survey and mapping missions. In principle, plan (see Table 4.1.). Such large scale maps options for orthorectified imageries can be done mostly were produced either from LIDAR/aerial through photogrammetry mapping (producing photogrammetry mission or from satellite imageries aerial photographs using airplane or UAV), data acquisition. As of 2015, it is reported that satellite imageries acquisition and processing. In the coverage of large scale maps in Indonesia principle, the decision to choose which method is very minimum, far too low for supporting local to be implemented by local government highly government agenda to provide spatial plans and depend with the level of detail to be achieved and disaster risk plan. the budget allocated by the local government. For instance, for supporting spatial plan that require According to national law (UU No. 24/2007 on map at scale 1:5,000, the use of orthorectified high disaster management and No. 26/2009 on spatial resolution satellite imageries is sufficient. In order to planning), local government must provide plans produce maps with larger scale, local government represented in forms of planning maps. To fulfill need to have higher accuracy of imageries which this need, local agencies need to ask government only can be achieved using photogrammetry agencies (in this case BIG and LAPAN) to provide method (but not with UAV). Uses of UAV imageries the data. Most of data required by local agencies could still be accepted for relatively small areas are high resolution satellite imageries or aerial (e.g., not larger than 1,000 ha) or for corridor imageries. As required by the authority, the mapping where field control points and observations should be more than enough. Table 3.1 The scale of maps and its practical use Scale Description Uses 1:10,000 Houses and buildings look tiny tend to be grouped Micro zonation 1:5,000 Houses and buildings look small but still visible Detailed spatial plan 1:2,500 Houses and buildings look clear Preliminary design and block plan 14 Collaborative Mapping for Disaster and Climate Resilience in indonesia Table 3.2 Types of data sources for producing base layer in collaborative mapping Sensor/Sources Scope Output Budget Aerial Imageries+LIDAR Basically not limited but Aerial Photos+DEM 6-10 USD/ha, the larger will be efficient for > area the cheaper the 10,000 ha cost Satellite Imageries Not limited depending Imageries* Minimum 1,200 USD/ on the imageries scenes for archives availability UAV Smaller area (<1,000 Imageries ** 2-4 USD/ha ha), corridor shape area (5-8 km or smaller) * It can be converted into orthorectified imageries when high resolution Digital Elevation Model (e.g. Map Contour from 1:10,000, elevation data from active sensors (LIDAR, SAR) are available. ** It can be converted into orthorectified imageries GCPs and more height measurements on the field are required. Quality assurance The result of the analysis should meet the required accuracy, e.g., for a map with 1:5,000 scale, the Quality assurance is mandatory especially to horizontal and vertical accuracy must be less validate planimetric/horizontal quality of the base than 50 cm (for scale 1:5,000) and less than 50 map becomes crucial because the data will be used cm (1:2,300). In Winongo collaborative mapping by local government and local agencies. BIG owns mission, the basic map acquired from UAV a responsibility to assess and to check the base photographs were successfully assessed by BIG map quality. The result of the check will be the and accepted as base map for the Winongo area at document specifying whether the result meet the 1:5,000 (Type I) or at 1:2,500 (Type II). quality requirement or not. 15 IV. Case Studies The studies have been dealt a lot with riverbank IV. 1. Mount merapi post-disaster with disaster prone areas. Riverbank have been recovery the good example on how effective spatial plan and monitoring have been crucial point to prevent and mitigate disasters. Riverbank areas in both Context Yogyakarta and Balikpapan are vulnerable to Mount Merapi is a very active stratovolcano flood, landslides where settlement and disaster situated between Central Java and Yogyakarta mitigation infrastructures are not well in place. The Province. The last major eruption was happened in collaborative mapping cast stakeholders to explore 2010. The total damages and losses reached over problems and solutions through the map. The map four trillion rupiahs and have displaced more than is seen as a proxy to find best possible solutions for 200.000 people according to a joint assessment improved disaster risk reduction. study conducted by BNPB (National Disaster As the studies aim to produce a map to be used Management Authority), World Bank, UNDP in as a reference, the quality of the base map 2010. In 2011, community-based settlement becomes crucial. For that reason, the base map of rehabilitation and reconstruction project was collaborative map, developed from aerial imageries initiated. The families relocated from their burnt or aerial satellites, must comply with national villages to permanent houses in safer areas. The standard on the base map accuracy (BIG regulation relationship between trigger, gap, requirements No. 15/2014). This standard can be seen as quality that motivate the risk zone mapping in Merapi post assurance policy that the city and districts must eruption project is given in Figure 6. meet when utilizing base maps in developing city A hazard map depicting hazard prone areas has plan and block plan. been published by Center of Volcanology and The following parts will present case studies in Disaster Mitigation (PVMBG). However, projection utilizing collaborative mapping methods. The first of affected areas and hazard prone areas on the is utilization of collaborative mapping approach in field is difficult to confirm on its accuracy, due to villages in Sleman impacted by the Merapi eruption the small scale of the map, i.e. 1:50,000. Mapping for post disaster recovery. The second and third are of pyroclastic flow and lahar hazard prone areas the use case of collaborative mapping studies in using LIDAR Mapping and GIS modelling were Winongo and Ampal Rivers for risk sensitive urban done by the BNPB, PVMBG through Agency for redevelopment. Technological Development and Research of Volcanology (BPPTK). In addition, the Ministry of Public Works (PU) produce settlement zonation based on disaster risk zones. 16 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia Figure 6 Rationale for conducting Merapi GAP Detailed Risk Zone Mapping TRIGGER Lack of accurate map REQUIREMENTS depicting affected area A map that picture Relocation and while exiting maps are less actual environmental settlement plan in post detailed no georeferenced condition after the eruption Merapi eruption unintegrated, and the boundary inaccesible of affected area SOLUTION Collaborative Mapping offers a solution that fill the gaps for comprehensive mapping & analysis Figure 7 Footprints of Merapi lava flow 17 While there are many official maps concerning risk CollaboratoRS zones and safe settlements available, there are The mapping activities involved mainly BIG still difficulties to integrate and use the maps as for technical consultation. BNPB and BPBD, decision-making support for operational planning and Department of Public Work, River Authority reconstruction activities. Meanwhile community maps, (BBWS), BPPTK, National Land Agency provide although maps provide detailed information, have no existing hazard and thematic maps. Data gathering exact position on boundaries as the maps were not was facilitated by Bappeda of Yogyakarta province georeferenced. These facts raise two emerging needs and Sleman District. for data integration and for ground truthing. Facts that available maps produced by various institutions and Primary data collecting involving district/village organizations were not created based on the same leaders. The data taken through series of reference or standardised mapping system have discussion, interview and field survey. Community made these maps difficult, if not impossible,to be participation in the mapping processes became integrated. Further, the available maps are also not possible through the support from the team accessible to the public while the mechanism for data conducting Community-based Settlement dissemination is not effective and efficient. Thus, Rehabilitation and Reconstruction (REKOMPAK) data integration require georeferencing processes and project. data management to make the data seamless and The collaborators is working together in a joint ready to be tested on the field. survey and providing feedback during consultation Global Positioning Systems (GPS) and Geographic workshop in order to validate the map. A group Information Systems (GIS) technologies for of survey and mapping team from University of positioning and data management provide a Gadjah Mada (UGM) - a partner university was solution on ground truthing on the field in order to responsible to facilitate and implement technical develop collaborative maps depicting risk zones’ work of the mapping supported byWorld Bank and boundaries. GFDRR (Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery). . Figure 8 Stages in collaborative mapping in post merapi eruption BIG, BNPB, BIG, BNPB, COLLABORATORS BPBD, BPPTK, BPBD, BPPTK, BBWS, BPN. BBWS, BPN. BAPPEDA UGM Team Bappeda BAPPEDA (Sleman& REKOMPAK BPPTK (Sleman& DIY) BPBD DIY) ACQUISITION SYNCHONIZATION SOLUTION Base map preparation Collaborative Mapping Primary and secondary offers a solution VERIFICATION that fill the gap Data collection Georeferencing Participatory mapping Spatial adjustment Spatial Analysis Field survey DISSEMINATION Cartography Geometry quality check Public expose Offer site plan Camat & Lurah Village officers Village officers Camat & Lurah Village officers Hamlet leaders Hamlet leaders Village officers Hamlet leaders REKOMPAK REKOMPAK Hamlet leaders Community Community Community Community COMMUNITY GROUPS 18 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia Method infrastructures seen on the 2012 aerial photos as vector data, 5) To compile BPPTK maps on the The methods including :1) To collect all existing data potential hazards of pyroclastic flow and lahar regarding basic layers (administrative boundaries, flood, produced from LIDAR mapping and GIS building, land uses, infrastructures) and disaster modelling, 6) To develop standards and protocols for related zones (impacted areas, hazard prone areas conducting joint survey involving stakeholders and zonation, planning zonation) of Mt Merapi from community , 7) To conduct a series of precise GPS stakeholders , 2) To make uses of latest products survey to delineate: administrative boundaries, past of large-scale mapping on Mt Merapi, i.e. LIDAR impacted areas, predictive hazard zones together data and aerial photo maps produced by BPPTK with BPBD, Sleman’s Technical Agencies, BPPTK, and UGM (2012) as the reference background for Bappeda, Village Leaders, Hamlet/Dusun Leaders, collaborative mapping, 3) To convert community REKOMPAK, etc and 8) To discuss with the expert maps from REKOMPAK project as spatial features on the recommendation based on the result and field plotted on top of the referenced aerial photos, 4) activities. To digitize spatial features of building and public Figure 9 Field Validation activities 19 Figure 10 Participatory Mapping to validate the draft of maps at hamlet level 20 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia The following layers are secondary data coming from different technical agencies are compiled on top of the basemap on which the disaster related information are plotted. Type of data and format Sample of Data Preview Detailed Spatial Plan (RDTR/Rencana Detail Tata Ruang) from Public Works Agency (JPG) / Rencana Detil Tata Ruang dari Dinas PU (JPG) River and dam infrastructures from BBWS Serayu Opak (SHP) LIDAR and aerial photos of Merapi and Yogyakarta from BPPTK and UGM (SHP) 21 Type of data and format Sample of Data Preview Sleman District Land Controlling Department (SHP) Community Settlement Plan from REKOMPAK Sleman (PDF) Figure 11 Existing data available 22 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia Figure 12 Sample of resulted detailed risk map 23 RESULTS The resulted maps of risk zones were disseminated and discussed by 27 hamlet representatives. The collaborative mapping study of detailed risk Record has been made on community zones in Merapi includes three villages considered agreement regarding 27 hamlet boundaries, local to be the most villages at risk in Merapi namely infrastructures and risk zones. This spatial Umbulharjo, Kepuharjo and Glagaharjo. The database of Mount Merapi villages affected by experiment resulted a detailed map of 3 villages in disaster is disseminated to local stakeholders and scale of 1:5,000 and detailed map of 27 hamlets in managed by Yogyakarta Provincial Bappeda and scale of 1:2,000 – 1: 3,000. The map depicting risk BPBD. zone boundaries taken through the data integration, validation, ground truthing of the affected areas and The resulting data is converted into maps to enable consultation with experts. local village and government to communicate the risk zones to communities and stakeholders The map comprises of georeferenced information involved in recovery activities, particularly to support of administrative boundaries, houses, pubic the settlement plans. The maps have been used building and infrastructures. Delineation of hazard by the local government and REKOMPAK as the zones of pyroclastic flow, lahar, landslides as base information for decision-support in community- well as exposures such as houses and critical based settlement planning activities in the new infrastructure in the area within the hazard zones area. was resulted by community members. The result from participatory mapping was then validated The availability of such detailed map have led to and supported with spatial analysis in combination its use for BPN to conduct land consolidation and with local leader’s information and hazard expert’s manage land administration for tenure out of risk justification. The layers were then integrated with zone area. As a result, families relocated to the maps produced by PVMBG, BNPB, BPPTK, PU new settlement whose land parcels directly affected and REKOMPAK. by pyroclastic flow obtain certificates of ownership for their parcels. Figure 13 New Settlement environment 24 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia IV. 2. Risk-Sensitive Urban Planning with uncertainty of natural hazard occurrences. However, the ability to create such plans is often of Winongo River, Yogyakarta, constrained by the lack of available high resolution Indonesia geospatial data that meet both technical and legal requirements in developing a formal block plan. Recent development in geospatial technology Context such as the handheld GPS, coupled with growing The Winongo River is one of the major streams movement to involve citizens in local mapping that flow across the Javanese cultural rich city of activities have opened an opportunity to incorporate Yogyakarta. The river holds critical roles in urban community-generated geospatial information into a ecosystem and heritage yet it also overwhelmed with formal planning process. The collaborative process in carrying capacity issues due to fast and uncontrolled mapping offers solution to high resolution geospatial development of urban settlements. River pollution, information that could facilitate people-oriented and ineffective drainage system, poor domestic waste risk-sensitve urban development. water management and lack of access to fresh water The City of Yogyakarta named Winongo River as are daily problems people in the riverbanks have to locus to deliver Detailed Risk Mapping that assesses deal with. Even worse, they also threatened by flood vulnerability to flood and landslide. The selection inundation, landslides, and fires that come across of Winongo River represents growing area which frequently with almost knowledgeable pattern. The require updates while base map is not available. relationship between trigger, gap, requirements that Both hazards had been identified in the Bank’s prior motivate the project is given in Figure 14. rapid risk assessment in Yogyakarta i.e. the City The World Bank Disaster Risk Management (DRM) Risk Diagnostics which followed by the pre-feasibility team held engagement with the city of Yogyakarta study of Winongo River. The study recommends to figure out ways to address the gap. It is agreed concept of “the Winongo Riverwalk” to address to prioritize area that require immediate attention disasters and climate change issues that align such as settlement that regularly flooded. The with Yogyakarta City’s vision to further develop its development of detailed, risk-sensitive urban spatial education, cultural tourism, and services sectors in a plans is critical for cities to adapt to and cope sustainable manner. Figure 14 Rationale for Winongo Disaster TRIGGER GAP REQUIREMENTS Risk and Climate Change Absence or lack of access Recurrently flooded and Maps that picture actual to valid and detailed map Mapping slum area need urgent for urban stakeholders to condition of an area response of urban including built design program upgrading or environment, renewal program infrastructure and hazards SOLUTION Collaborative Mapping offers a solution that fill the gaps for comprehensive mapping & analysis 25 As the city was keen to showcase the Winongo with the city government in terms of community Riverwalk, one crucial step to realize the concept is building, environmental protection and disaster producing Detailed Risk Map that picture segments mitigation planning. of the river into high resolution spatial information, for In the study, a local team tied to Bappeda is needed instance a 1:1,000 scale of map, to allow vulnerability to compile and reconcile data from institutions and assessment be carried out with great detail. The community. In this study, the local team role was resulted map can be used as basic reference to undertaken by the UGM team, whose expertise enable integrated spatial planning adhering to is related to geomatics engineering (including suitable settlements’ structure and pattern in city field surveys and geospatial analytics, community planning to support sustainable development that mapping and communication strategy to public taken into account hazard potentials, slums related officials). The mapping team ensures the project problems (socio-economic, utilities, open space) and carried out in high level quality in terms of process climate change impacts. and outputs. collaborators METHODS The study can be seen as a business model of The methods implemented in the Winongo study collaborative mapping broken-down into four is following the general approach and methods steps based on input-output relationship (see discussed in part II on Methods. In this study, the Figure). Each step includes dialogue between data base map was acquired by utilizing UAV imageries representative which in many occasions had lead with additional field topographic survey survey. Field to data conflict resolutions. In Yogyakarta, Bappeda survey activities include a survey to conduct precise took responsibility in leading the process. Aside GPS measurement to provide control points for UAV from commitment of formal agencies, the study mission and topographic mapping and a terrestrial received support from the Winongo Community i.e. survey to measure riverbanks’ topographic profile FKWA (Forum Komunikasi Winongo Asri) which was considered most proactive and well engaged Figure 15 COLLABORATORS Bappeda Bappeda BPN Bappeda BIG BPN Steps undertaken and parties Dinas PU UGM UGM Dinas PU involved in the mapping BPBD BPBD processes ACQUISITION SYNCHONIZATION SOLUTION Base map preparation Collaborative Mapping Primary and secondary offers a solution VERIFICATION that fill the gap Data collection Georeferencing Participatory mapping Spatial adjustment Spatial Analysis Field survey DISSEMINATION Cartography Geometry quality check Public expose Offer site plan Kelurahan Kelurahan RT/RW RT/RW RT/RW FKWA/ FKWA/ FKWA/ Community Community Community COMMUNITY GROUPS 26 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia using digital total station for improved digital terrain built and problems that require solution. A detailed model. In regard to smallest unit of administrative planning is created upon such canvas. The same boundaries, while the case study in Merapi post reference allows technical agencies and community disaster recovery uses participatory mapping and participate in planning and monitoring. joint field survey to delineate dusun boundaries, here in the Winongo Case, participatory mapping Second, it creates connection between community activities were used to delineate neighborhood efforts in generating geospatial information with boundaries (RT and RW boundaries). formal planning process. The participatory/ Participatory mapping activities were attended by collaborative mapping generally serves two local representatives of 8 segments coordinated by purposes: 1) engagement between the community FKWA. In total there were two sessions allocated and government experts on natural hazards for participatory mapping activity in each segment. and increase awareness of hazard exposure to Each session was attended by 10-20 local community assets; and 2) updating and delineation representatives. The first meeting session mainly to of spatial objects to develop high resolution maps. acquire spatial boundaries of neighborhood areas Both processes constitute critical aspects in (RT, RW, block), settlement infrastructures, hazard participatory planning, especially in the context of areas and to copile spatially-referenced inputs redefining spatial layout to mitigate future disasters from representatives regarding settlement quality (in this case flooding and localized landslide). and disaster management. The second session of participatory mapping, done in the end of the result study after the final map is ready, was mainly done The Collaborative Mapping at Winongo Yogyakarta to disseminate the results and to accommodate delivers final outputs that include (1) data products corrections from the community members. both in the forms of high resolution base maps as well as the derived thematic maps from the Cartographic work and spatial analysis were collaborative process and (2) Module of Collaborative done iteratively to produce the base map and the Mapping procedure for future use. thematic map of risk-sensitive urban development in riverbank areas. A ready-installed online map is Risk-sensitive spatial plans can inform investment also provided to the local government. The spatial decisions including the definition of land-use analysis aims to illustrate the usefulness of the designation that control new development and resulted map to help local government to handle infrastructure layout in hazardous areas or the possible relocation issues, land administration identification of necessary mitigation investments and urban development integration as well as to (e.g., including through land/spatial consolidation) provide riverbank area upgrading scenarios to to protect existing or future development. However, improve disaster risk infrastructure and settlement majority of cities in Indonesia lack of official high infrastructure quality. resolution aerial satellites and spatial database, this include Yogyakarta. There are at least two benefits of implementing The critical point in project activities was to define the collaborative mapping: first, it rearranges spatial base map which is unavailable for Winongo River governance by integrating spatial data with special area. It was decided to produce high resolution aerial thematic objectives into one georeferenced base photos which serve as updated base maps, and to map accessible for urban stakeholders. Various utilize the ortho-rectified aerial photos in collaborative data and maps from different technical agencies mapping to delineate hazard zones and to map key are collected and integrated with community data infrastructures. which compiling community problems into one map. The map is a canvas to plot objects that have been The specific products that have been completed at the end of the project are outlined below: 27 Figure 16 Mosaic orthophoto and DSM derived from UAV imagery 28 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia Figure 17 DSM (top left), Contour map (top right), Cross sections produced in the project (bottom) 1. Mosaic of Orthophoto and Digital Surface Model (DSM) 2. Two dimensional cross-section of the river 3. Collaborative thematic maps. There are several basic themes produced, including: settlement, environmental condition, land Figure 18 Land parcel by the legal status, the red one indicates blocks traditionally registered as the Sultanate Ground 29 status, disaster response related facilities, and potential for tourism spots. 4. Spatial Analysis. The spatial analysis also constitutes as an important work and also as tool to engage stakeholders in building common understanding about hazards, risk and risk mitigation options. Several simple analyses to assess the overlap between space occupation and river buffer zone (as proxy to hazard boundary), population density of neighborhood blocks, evacuation route options, are among the examples of outputs produced by the analysisoverlap between space occupation and river buffer zone (as proxy to hazard boundary), population density of neighborhood blocks, evacuation route options, are among the examples of outputs produced by the analysis. The thematic maps produced in this project have spatial accuracy that meets the Government’s standard on provision of base map and the indicators as stipulated by the National Mapping Accuracy for the scale of 1:2,500. Figure 19 Some spatial analyses produced from the project Population Density Heat Map Estimation of structures affected by applying the River buffer zone 30 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia IV. 3. Risk-Sensitive Urban Planning of Ampal River, Balikpapan context Ampal River is one of the main rivers that flows through Balikpapan City, East Kalimantan. Areas surrounding the river is prone to floods and landslide due to excessive development in its upstream areas. A number of studies have demonstrated that changes in land use in the upper watershed areas of the river, from agricultural areas to settlement areas, have significantly reduced the water storage capacity of the land, thus increased the flooding intensity. A massive increase in the volume of surface runoff cannot be accommodated in Ampal River, which has already experienced severe siltation due to erosion at the upper stream. Increased concentration of suspended sediments has intensified from year to year and led to clogging in several points in Ampal River (Figure 20). Balikpapan City Government was committed to Figure 20 rearrange and improve land use management in Condition of Ampal River riverbank that areas around the riverbank of Ampal River. For that experiences rapid development purpose, the government needed a detailed mapping of the areas as a key instrument for spatial planning, which would need to be developed in a collaborative TRIGGER GAP REQUIREMENTS Recurrently flood and Absence or lack of access Maps that picture actual landslide disaster events to valid and detailed map condition of an area demand for urgent for practical uses including built response of urban environment, upgrading or infrastructure renewal program and hazards Figure 21 SOLUTION Rationale for Ampal Collaborative Mapping Project Collaborative Mapping offers a solution that fill the gaps for comprehensive mapping & analysis 31 manner involving the relevant stakeholders. The COLLABORATORS/STAKEHOLDERS rationale that motivates the project is given in Figure INVOLVED 21. Agency/ As a first step, a detailed map would be needed as Role organization a basic reference in spatial planning. Through the spatial planning the city government defined the spatial structure and settlement pattern appropriate Balikpapan City facilitated FGDs to identify • ­ to the city development plan, as part of the efforts Bappeda issues related to land-use in to achieve sustainable development. Bappeda of areas around Ampal River Balikpapan City involved a Mapping Consultant Team • ­ facilitated consultative from the Faculty of Civil Engineering and Planning of workshops with the multi- Balikpapan University to conduct a detailed mapping. stakeholders on the map and The goal of the pilot project in Ampal River was design of the target areas to build a collaboration platform among key • ­ coordinated geospatial data stakeholders in the city to jointly formulate detailed collection and other technical risk maps and recommendations for the spatial matters with the local sectoral planning of areas around the river. It was expected units that the resulting detailed map could be used as a Mapping Team made data inventory from • ­ reference in the preparation of detailed spatial plan from Faculty of relevant SKPD of Ampal River areas, with a view of making the Civil Engineering areas resilient to disaster and climate change-related • ­ inter-local agencies survey and Planning, risks. The map would be presented in a user-friendly Balikpapan field survey • ­ format that would be easy to understand, use and University data processing and analysis • ­ update by the city government. UGM mapping team Quality assurance prepared basic maps of Public Work Agency ­ of Balikpapan City Balikpapan City data verification and validation Camat/Head of Sub- ­ District data verification and validation Lurah/Head of Urban ­ Ward Community data verification and validation ­ Methods The methods implemented to complete the Ampal River case study is similar to ones implemented in Winongo and Merapi. Here the base map was produced from aerial imageries produced by BIG in 2015, thus capable in providing a better quality of geometry and radiometry aspects of imageries than the base map used in Winongo and Merapi. 32 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia While in Winongo, land parcel map representing and kelurahan areas, identify public and social land parcel boundaries and their corresponding facilities, validate these facilities, and provide missing ownership rights for the study area can be information in the basic map such as flood and integrated well, here in Ampal project the land landslide affected areas, and the boundaries of these parcel map cannot be used for analysis due to data hazard-prone areas. Together with the community, availability constraints. they also proposed measures to reduce flood and landslide risks in their respective areas. Stages in digital data processing from the primary results and secondary data and data that came from The Ampal River pilot project had 3 outputs as the field survey to make basic map included spatial following: adjustment of secondary data, survey inputs and a. Thematic map with a scale of 1:2,500 for the attribute data, and spatial analysis. The subsequent entire Ampal River areas process constituted validation workshop and b. Flood Risk Map and Landslide Risk Map of verification of thematic maps, and compilation Ampal River’s riverbank of data from new information obtained from the c. Design plan for Modern Market in Ampal River segment developed by stakeholders that would be areas used as pilot in the improvement of the land-use planning. The last stage was finalization of the collaborative Thematic map with a scale of 1:2500 map by the incorporation of corrections in the form for the entire Ampal River areas of addition of research areas, geometry of some objects, cartography, and map layout. The mapping team started to prepare detailed risk map of Ampal River areas by delineating areas The large scale thematic maps contain the following that used to be affected by flood. To facilitate information: discussion and overlaying of the map, mapped a. Administrative boundaries (urban wards, areas were divided into seven segments. The neighborhood areas/RT) mapping team used basic map and secondary data b. Land contour from Balikpapan City Bappeda and Public Works c. River demarcation areas Agency in the form of aerial photos from 2014, d. Critical infrastructures (education, health, topographical map from 2004, DED Normalization social and religious) map of Ampal River from 2012, DED Coastal Road e. Land ownership status map of Balikpapan City from 2012, and Spatial Plan f. Areas prone to flooding and landslide map of Balikpapan City from 2012. g. Social-economic status Digitation of basic map was done by making vector h. Land use classification (industry, settlement, data from aerial photographs of 2014, which were etc.) grouped into several layers including: street layer, i. Location of control dam/water catchment building layer, land-use layer, river layer, and j. Potential land for consolidation drainage layer. The thematic maps that had gone through Collaborative mapping was done after the field the process of validation and verification were survey activities were done. The process involved presented as a GIS database that would be used community and government apparatuses from the as reference by stakeholders in the planning and urban ward/kelurahan level. Local government officers development of Ampal River areas in Balikpapan helped delineate boundaries between neighborhood City. 33 Figure 22 One of collaborative mapping product on Flood and Landslide susceptibility 34 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia COLLABORATORS Bappeda Bappeda Bappeda BPN University of BPN BIG Dinas PU Balikpapan Dinas PU BPBD Team BPBD ACQUISITION SYNCHONIZATION SOLUTION Base map preparation Collaborative Mapping Primary and secondary offers a solution VERIFICATION that fill the gap Data collection Georeferencing Participatory mapping Spatial adjustment DISSEMINATION Field survey; Spatial Analysis Map geometry Cartography quality check Public expose of thematic maps; Camat, Camat, Camat, Offer site plan Mapping Lurah, Lurah, Lurah, Consultant Community Community Community COMMUNITY GROUPS Figure 23 Steps undertaken and parties involved in collaborative mapping process Flood Risk Map and Landslide Risk Segment 1 Map for areas around Ampal River Flooding usually occurred due to sea tides, but it The detailed risk maps contained information only affected a small section of settlement areas. about flood and landslide hazards that had been The width of the river was around 30 meter. consulted with experts and community leaders. Segment 2 Risk analysis was generated from the analysis to determine the level of risk based on the hazard and Flood-affected area in this segment covered an vulnerability. area of 36.17 Ha with height between 0.5 and 1.5 meter. Flooding was caused by heavy rain and The analysis of flood-prone areas around Ampal sea tide. Landslide was caused by erosion in the River was done by using community data gathered river. The width of the river was 10-18 meter. from participatory mapping activities and analysis of the topographical map. The data used from Segment 3 participatory mapping were mainly information Flood-affected area in this segment covered an related to extent and intensities of historical flood area of 22.45 Ha. This area was lower than the events. Locations and heights of floods were plotted surrounding streets and hence often inundated into collaborative map, and then overlaid with with the overflow from Ampal River. Besides topographical map to delineate flood-prone areas. rain intensity, narrowing of the river and heavy The analysis of landslide-prone areas was done sedimentation had played a significant role in by using data from the participatory mapping that triggering floods. were overlaid with slope elevation data. The results from the analysis of areas around Ampal River that are prone to flood and landslide hazards were elaborated in the following segments. 35 Segment 4 Design for Rearrangement of Ampal River’s Modern Market Area Flood-affected area in this segment covered an area of 20.73 Ha from a total of 91.24 Ha. The proposed design for spatial rearrangement This segment was also prone to landslide due of Ampal River areas took into consideration the to its steep slope. Flooding in this segment was technical appropriateness and the economic, caused by rain intensity and silting-up of the river social, cultural and environmental feasibility. The due to heavy sedimentation. The width of the recommendations covered issues related to land- river was 8-10 meter. use planning, infrastructure planning and spatial zoning. Segment 5 Ampal River pilot project utilized collaborative map Flood-affected area in this segment covered an in analyzing the Strength, Weaknesses, Opportunity area of 59.04 Ha. This area was the meeting and Threat of Modern Market development in point of three tributaries of Ampal River, and the form of Design for Spatial Rearrangement hence the area affected by flooding was quite of the Segment around Modern Market areas. significant. Flooding was mostly caused by Some strategic policies had been suggested to be increased intensity of rain, sedimentation, and implemented, there are: narrowing of the river in several locations. Also, in several places the river embankments had been a. The realization of one-map policy or decision- broken. making based on the same data and map was needed at city level to ensure the coherence of Segment 6 planning, implementation and maintenance Flood-affected area in this segment covered b. The realization of land acquisition in Modern an area of 32.55 Ha. Flooding occurred during Market/Fresh Market areas heavy rain with a duration of more than two c. The construction of control dam to contain hours. This was caused by the narrowing of the water flow to the three secondary rivers river that had greatly reduced its capacity to hold d. The follow up to conduct further study of the the excessive volume of rain water. proposal to develop Fresh Market Areas. Segment 7 lFlood-affected area in this segment covered an area of 8.0 Ha. Flooding was mostly caused by rain intensity and silting up of the river. There was also an area that was prone to landslide in RT 07 of Gunung Samarinda Baru ward. 36 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia Figure 24 Flood prone areas map 37 V. Utilization of Collaborative Mapping Projects From case studies elaborated in Part IV, the overall V. 1. Land Consolidation in Mount impression gained at the final workshop on the result Merapi’s Post Disaster Recovery dissemination has been the same. The collaborative maps gain positive feedback and interest from stakeholders. Mainly, stakeholders appreciate on After the Mount Merapi eruption 2010, the local the level of detail the map can offer and secondly on government unleashed a regulation that sub- the collaborative processes in data collection and villages affected directly by the eruption must not validation. Further, the potential uses of the map be used as settlement areas. This means villagers can be understood very well by stakeholders. As a that live in areas which were burnt or damaged by result, the sense of belonging and ownership of the pyroclastic flow must be relocated to new places. maps produced grow strong across the involved Local government and REKOMPAK then launched collaborators and stakeholders. a supporting program called community-based settlement planning activities aiming at providing This part will focus on the use of collaborative maps new settlements to impacted residents. Meanwhile produced. How the unified data and map produced the impacted areas defined as zero settlement and can be optimally used to support local government building units include land parcels owned by residents. needs in urban and rural development. Three post mapping activities will be showcases. First, the Land consolidation is a strategy to readjust and utilization of the collaborative map to support the rearrange the boundaries of land parcels and land consolidation in Mount Merapi after the 2010’s their ownerships for improved spatial plan that eruption. Secondly, the utilization of the collaborative provide among others better access to settlement map to provide decision-support for risk sensitive infrastructure and better preparedness for a disaster. urban development in Winongo and Ampal rivers. In case of Mount Merapi, the readjustment and rearrangement were initially to also accommodate needs for evacuation routes, community cattle ranch, local roads and drainages. In Indonesia, Numbers of land consolidation is a program activity that is done Villages Hamlet Land under auspices of BPN and DPPD (BPN 2014). The Subjects outcome of the land consolidation program is land Parcels Umbulharjo Pangukrejo 468 350 certificates to residents in the project area (or new ones for the land parcels that have been certificated). Umbulharjo Pelemsari 167 121 One condition is applied in Merapi land consolidation Kepuharjo Jambu 292 172 program which is that the land certificate is an Kepuharjo Kaliadem 230 173 ownership right with type of nonresidential use, such Kepuharjo Kopeng 205 154 as: farming land. With this certain type of certificates, Kepuharjo Petung 325 200 residents cannot rebuild or add building objects in their land parcels. In total there were 1,687 parcels Total 1,687 1,170 located at 6 hamlets (known as Dusun) in 2 villages certificated in December 2014 as the result of the land consolidation activity. The land certificates have been handed over to residents who are the subjects of the land parcels in December 2014. 38 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia The land consolidation project was done by These steps interact a lot with village officers, Yogyakarta Province and Sleman BPN from community leaders, and land owners. The required January to December 2014. The steps undertaken activity of topographic and land use mapping during the project include (Yogyakarta BPN 2014): was not done since the project agreed to use the collaborative map. The collaborative map resulted • Site identification from Mt. Merapi’s Post Disaster Recovery produced • Socialization and community meeting a reference map at scale 1:2,500 depicting • Agreement and consensus building topographic layers and thematic information, used • Site selection as a reference for National Land Office to do land • Subjects and objects identification consolidation in the area. In fact, the collaborative • Perimeter and boundaries’ measurements map resulted in 2013 was used in many steps to • Topographic and land use mapping support site identification, subjects and objects • Parcel-based block plan design identification and to be used as the base map in • Community discussion on land boundaries the process for parcel-based block design. The delineation end result of land parcel map resulted from lnd • Release and land consolidation Boundary consolidation project is seen as follow. Demarcation • Stake-out survey to apply land consolidation design and agreed land boundaries • Administration of land tenure process • Certificates production and hand-over Figure 25 The resulted collaborative map of Pangukrejo, Umbulharjo 39 Figure 26 Using the resulted collaborative map (top), land parcels were identified and their boundaries were designed producing parcel-based block plan design in land consolidation project From the land consolidation project implementation, V. 2. Spatial Decision-Support in Risk- it can be concluded that the base map resulted from collaborative mapping activity gave huge Sensitive Urban Development contribution not only for its initial purposes for Winongo river in Yogyakarta city and Ampal River settlement planning and detailed planning activities in Balikpapan city provide perfect examples about but also to support land consolidation project city rivers disturbed by business and settlement need for a detailed yet validated topographic map areas growth in the city, creating danger and of project area. Thus, one map can serve many vulnerability to residents living along the river purposes from land administration, spatial planning area. It is unfortunate that many settlement areas up to disaster management activities. As the maps in the riverbank are prone to flood inundation and were distributed to all stakeholders, village officers landslide events. Ampal dan Winongo projects and hamlet chiefs could use the collaborative map showcases the potential uses of the collaborative as a reference for their local references. map to produce spatial analysis regarding parcels and buildings to handle to support urban riverbank redevelopment for flood disaster mitigation. 40 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia Ampal riverbank area is experiencing fast In fact, the local government has allocated huge settlement and business areas grow. Unfortunately budget to revitalize and improve the city drainages the increase of houses and building objects near to make city areas less vulnerable to flood. This the river has increased the risk for wider flood plan however is difficult to be implemented as many inundation and more frequent landslide events (see land parcels are till in disputes or in uncertain status, the figure). thus make the improvement of the city infrastructure becomes difficult. One possible solution for this is the implementation of land consolidation project. Similar to the case of Merapi land consolidation, the site identification for urban land consolidation in Ampal River can be easily developed using the collaborative map produced for Ampal river (see Figure 28). As for Winongo case, the various technical data collected from technical agencies are valuable data that enable local government to do spatial analysis to implement risk-sensitive urban development in the riverbank areas. To illustrate the utilization of the map, here are some outcomes resulted from spatial Figure 27 analysis done on top of the collaborative map. The Flood inundation nearby the Ampal riverbank is frequent experience for following are illustrated usefulness for city planning local residents especially when heavy rain shower the city more than two hours resulted from spatial analyses done in Winongo Case study. Figure 28 The green aggregated parcel blocks were identified as parcels potential to be included in land consolidation project to support city infrastructure improvement 41 V. 2. 1. Calculating Building density Building density in a segment can be calculated by comparing the total area of built environments against the total area of a segment, seen as follow: total area of built environment Buidling density= x 100% total segment area Steps used to calculate building density are : a. To select building using spatial query (Within) of QGIS spatial query. b. To calculate building area. c. To calculate segment/block area. d. To calculate building density. Density building is then visualized using heatmap method with radius of determined circle is using the value of individual building area. The results of heatmap visualization of building density for each Segment. Figure 29 Density buidling heatmap of Segment 1 and 2 (left) as well as 3 and 4 (right) of Winongo River 42 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia V. 2. 2. Calculating imaginary demarcation lines on riverside areas The government regulation on River (PP. No. 38/2011) specifies that a city river like Winongo that has depth from 3 up to 20 meters, many are without riverbank structure, should be freed from settlements and has at a free space at least 15 meters from the left and right side of the edge of the river (see Figure 30). Such imaginary demarcation lines on the riverbanks can be seen as an awakening call to simulate how the regulation would affect the riverbank areas. Figure 30 The demarcation lines of 15 meters right and left from the edge of the river on segment 1 and 2 (left) as well as 3 and 4 (right). 43 From the analysis, it can be summarized that hundreds of houses need to be relocated and re- arranged (see Figure 31). Table Figure 31 Numbers of buildings that are fully or partially selected in case of urban Buildings that virtually are fully within or partially arrangement based upon riverside zonation (15 m within the 15 m of riverbanks zone Scope Within Intersect Segmen 1 4 67 Segmen 2 80 202 Segmen 3 16 94 Segmen 4 24 124 Segmen 5 42 137 Segmen 6 39 146 Segmen 7 37 126 Segmen 8 21 106 Total (sum) 263 1,002 Total buildings in all segments 263 1,002 44 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia Meanwhile the numbers of land parcels that need to be consolidated when urban arrangement will take place is shown in Figure 32. Figure 32 land parcels (with various riights i.e. use rights/HP, private ownerships/HM, building use rights/HGB) that virtually are fully within or partially within (i.e. intersect) the 15 m of riverbanks zone 45 V. 2. 3. Identifying the location of waste water treatment infrastructures The main concern in all segments is that the use of rain drainages is combined with waste water networks. In addition to that, there are some Waste Water Treatment Installation known as IPAL have been built and installed in the field but failed to beused. For this reason, waste water treatment seem essential to be provided in each community area. In this study, the location of IPAL is designed based upon its topographic features of each RW. The results of analysis are presented in Figure 33. Figure 33 The proposed location of IPAL to be installed in Segment 5 and 6 (left) as well as 7 and 8 (right) based on their access and the topography 46 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia V. 2. 4. Identifying where to put hydrant Optimal hydrants are proposed based upon community inputs and geospatial analysis considering the density of the buildings and accessibility of the local roads in the study area. Optimum hydrant locations were assumed to have a location that no later than 30 meters from the street. The hydrants should be able to reach all settlement blocks. The resulted analysis is shown in Figure 34. Figure 34 Proposed community hydrant installation in segment 1 and 2 (left) as well as 3 and 4 (right). 47 V. 2. 5. Calculting best evacuation routes Optimum evacuation routes were generated utilising tools road planning using GIS software. The destination of the evacuation routes is main public facilities and open space environment. Figure 35 Best evacuation routes for Segments 1 and 2 (left) as well as 3 and 4 (right) 48 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia The proposed routes for residents to move from V. 2. 6. Identifying land ownership settlements areas to targeted evacuation points in all segments were based upon the existing In regard to riverbank zonation, the existing condition of flood and landslide prone areas. All condition of land ownership in the study areas prone areas were successfully identified based shows that major types of rights are private upon historical data gathered during participatory ownerships (Hak Milik) and utilization right (Hak mapping activities and based upon flood discharge Pakai), the others are Building Use (HGB) and estimation from previous study (i.e. Feasibility Study not registered. There are actually many Sultanate of Winongo River by AECOM 2014). From the map Ground land ownerships in the study area but it can then be calculated numbers of buildings either mostly are not registered to BPN. The complete fully or partially threatened by landslide and floods. situation of land ownership in the study area can Figure 36 show the results. be calculated based upon the collaborative map produced. The corresponding numbers of buildings that are constantly threatened by flood events are 431 buildings. Figure 36 Flood extent and threatened houses 49 Table. Composition of land tenureships based on their right types in the study area Seg Land Private Use Building Land HM Hak HGB Ment without ownerships (Hak Use with no (%) pakai (%) deed (hak Milik) Pakai) (HGB) deed (%) (%) 1 2005 1990 54 142 4191 47.84 47.48 1.28 2 1568 2230 46 88 3932 39.87 56.71 1.169 3 517 684 229 61 1491 34.67 45.87 15.36 4 426 625 30 20 1101 38.69 56.76 2.72 5 103 706 120 16 945 10.89 74.70 12.69 6 86 649 134 50 919 9.35 70.62 14.58 7 437 1062 353 59 1911 22.86 55.57 18.47 8 451 824 57 72 1404 32.12 58.69 4.06 In order to illustrate the composition of the land ownerships as presented in Figure 37 shows the situation of land tenureships surrounding the Winongo river. The types of ownerships can be not registered (belum terdaftar), private ownership (hak milik), building use (hak guna bangunan), use right (hak pakai). Figure 37 Land ownership situation in Winongo river 50 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia VI. Lesson Learned From the showcases on the development of collaborative maps (Chapter IV) and their usefulness the lessons learned on advantages and challenges of collaborative mapping projects can be identified. These lessons learnt are expected to create awareness and comprehension to assess opportunities in applying collaborative mapping projects for supporting detailed spatial planning and risk zonation for disaster management. VI. 1. Advantages vI. 1. 2. Strengthening spatial awareness VI. 1. 1. Efficient way to gather good In addition to the rapidness to derive the outcome quality data and the reduced cost for data acquisition, the A significant advantage of this approach is outcome of the collaborative mapping creates a that it offers lower budget and shorter time of better ownership to stakeholders involved in the actions than conventional mapping approaches. process. Through participatory mapping activities Government and local government mapping at the community level and stakeholders meeting projects require more budget to hire experts and involved local agencies, data sharing and data professionals that are not from the area. Using validation become more familiar to stakeholders. conventional implementation, consultants need Good quality product can be offered as it requires more time to get to know the local area and more the quality assurance from BPN and the level of resources to mobilize the team, whereas in the detailed of the content is validated by all parties. collaborative mapping approach, the consultants In participatory mapping sessions and stakeholder are the community, local leaders, village officers, workshop, environmental problems related disaster technical agency leaders and staff with scientist and their proposed solutions are expressed and and students are installed as facilitators. Merapi documented in the draft map. It combines top- project that required 4 months of actions spent down and bottom approaches, so more than just about 330 millions rupiah or 110 million rupiah for participatory mapping activities. In this regard, each village, Winongo project that covered about community and local staff become more familiar 500 ha of corridor mapping areas spent about 250 with maps and geospatial information on their niche. million rupiah or 700 thousand rupiah per ha to get complete geospatial features of contours, building The resulting map is, at the same time, an effective footprints, neighbourhood infrastructures, hazard tool for program planning and monitoring. First, areas, etc. In summary, the advantages of the once the problems and drawbacks are all spatially mapping approach include: represented and documented, local community used the map as a base to propose community- • It offers faster and cost efficiently map based plans to be submitted to sub district products office. From the government perspective, those • It offers better ownership values to spatially referenced problems and drawbacks will stakeholders be straightforward resources to develop priority actions. Interestingly, the current planning system endorse bottom-up planning programs. 51 Monitoring and evaluation on land developments VI. 1. 3. Extending possibilities and and permit issuance could be very effective to be outreach done on top of the collaborative map. The challenge The collaborative map can also be easily turned will be on the institution support and resource into a “living spatial canvas” to present field allocation to make sure that the useful information developments’ updates and to gather community resources gained from the collaborative map is feedback. The Web 2.0 technology has opened up used for planning and decision-support. Here are possibilities to mash up the web collaborative map the opportunities it can offer: (WebGIS) with social media as a crowd application, • Basis for well targetted public investments, even to be accessed through Mobile Apps. This has regulate land use, and increase resiliency been exemplified by many smartcity applications • Unlimited themes: high adaptability and (e.g. QLUE in Jakarta) where human sensors are interoperability employed to support city services’ improvement. • System and data base integration by vertical Connecting the web collaborative map application and horizontal with field sensors and human sensors is a huge potential to offer. VI. 2. Real challenges It must be acknowledged, that the challenges to produce a collaborative map of an area are difficult and complex. Not only on the data availability, quality, but also on the heterogeneity of the data format. Here is the summary: Items Challenge Response Base Map Availability of physical and digital Practical regulation to accelerate base map map of national standard generation Data source Not spatially adjusted format, out Triangulation with primary data, build consensus and of date, low resolution, misplaced, understanding confidentiality Thematic Lack of guidance about thematic Sectors to decide and prepare guideline for each and model data model on attributes taken into every thematic map account include layer, class and category Data sharing Disconnection of local and national Introduce platform of national data management data management Human Varied capacity of local consultants Promote training, advisory, knowledge sharing and resource networking with national pool of talents 52 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia References Aditya, T., 2010. Usability Issues in Applying Participatory Mapping for Neighborhood Infrastructure Planning. Transactions in GIS 14(S1): 119–147 Cai G and Yu B, 2009. Spatial annotation technology for public deliberation. Transactions in GIS 13: 123–46 Chambers R., 2006. Participatory mapping and Geographic Information Systems: Whose map? Who is empowered and who disempowered? Who gains and who loses? Electronic Journal on Information Systems in Developing Countries 25(2): 1–11 Craig, W. J. and Elwood, S., 1998. How and why community groups use maps and geographic information. Cartography and Geographic Information Systems 25(2): 95–104 Elwood, S., 2006. Critical issues in participatory GIS: Deconstructions, reconstructions, and new research directions. Transactions in GIS 10: 693–708 Krygier, J. B., 2002. A praxis of public participation GIS and visualization. In Craig W J, Harris T M, and Weiner D (eds) Community Participation and Geographic Information Systems. London, Taylor and Francis: 331–45 Sieber, R.E., 2006. Public Participation Geographic Information Systems: A literature review and framework. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 96: 491–507. Project Reports Aditya, T., Istarno, Andaru, R., Widjadjanti, N. (2013). Final Report of Merapi Detailed Risk Zone Mapping. Department of Geodetic Engineering, Faculty of Engineering & Yogyakarta Disaster Management (BPBD) & World Bank. Aditya, T., Andaru, R. (2015). Final Report of Collaborating Mapping Activities in Winongo River. Department of Geodetic Engineering, Faculty of Engineering & Yogyakarta City local Planning (BAPPEDA) & World Bank. Rahmat, Mustakim, Harini, R., (2015). Final Report of Collaborating Mapping Activities in Ampal River. Faculty of Engineering, Balikpapan University & Balikpapan City Local Planning (BAPPEDA) & World Bank. National Land Agency (2014). Final Report of Land Consolidation in Merapi. Land Arrangement and Adjustment Unit, Yogyakarta Province’s Land Office. 53 Abbreviations & Acronyms BPBD DIY Yogyakarta Provincial Disaster Management Agency BAPPEDA Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah/Regional Development Planning Agency BBWS Balai Besar Wilayah Sungai/River Basin Development Agency BIG Badan Informasi Geospasial/Geospatial Information Agency BNPB Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana/National Disaster Management Authority BPN Badan Pertanahan Nasional /National Land Agency BPN Badan Pertanahan Nasional/National Land Agency BPPTK Badan Pengkajian dan Pengembangan Kegunungapian /Agency for Technological Development and Research of Volcanology BPPTKG Balai Penyelidikan dan Pengembangan Teknologi Kebencanaan Geologi/Research and Technology Development of Geological Disaster DED Detailed Engineering Design DEM Digital Elevation Model DIY Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta/Yogyakarta Special Region DPPD Dinas Pengendalian Pertanahan Daerah/Regional Land Control Department DRM Disaster Risk Management FKWA Forum Komunikasi Winongo Asri/Winongo Community GCP Ground Control Points GFDRR Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery GIS Geographic Information Systems GPS Global Positioning Systems IPAL Instalasi Pengolahan Air Limbah/Waste Water Treatment Installation LAPAN Lembaga Penerbangan dan Antariksa Nasional/National Institute of Aeronautics and Space PPK GPS Post Processing Kinematic GPS PU Pekerjaan Umum/Public Works PU ESDM Pekerjaan Umum, Energi dan Sumber Daya Mineral/Public Works, Energy and Natural Resources Agency PVMBG Pusat Vulkanologi dan Mitigasi Bencana Geologi/Center of Volcanology and Disaster Mitigation RDTR Rencana Detail Tata Ruang/Detailed Spatial Plan REKOMPAK Rehabilitasi dan Rekonstruksi Berbasis Masyarakat/Community-based Settlement Rehabilitation and Reconstruction RT and RW Rukun Tetangga and Rukun Warga/Neighborhood areas UAV Unmanned Aerial Vehicle 54 Collaborative Mapping of Detailed Geospatial Data for Disaster and Climate Resilience in Indonesia The Authors Trias Aditya is Associate Professor at the Department of Geodetic Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, UGM. Currently he is Head of Laboratory of Geoinformatics and Geospatial Information Infrastructure. He completed his Bachelor of Engineering in Geodetic Engineering from UGM (1998), received his MSc in Geoinformatics from ITC (2003) and PhD in Geoinformatics from ITC/Utrecht University (2007). His research interests include Cartography, Geospatial Data Infrastructure, Interoperable Geospatial Information System for Land Administration, Disaster Management, and Peatland Management Iwan Gunawan is Senior Natural Resources Specialist to the World Bank Environment and Landscapes program in Indonesia. Previously, he was leading the Disaster Risk Management team of the institution. He has a PhD from Texas A&M University in Regional Development (1994), an MS from Louisiana State University in Engineering Science (1991), and a BS in Geodetic Engineering from Universitas Gadjah Mada (1986). His engineering and planning background includes geospatial analysis, geospatial modeling, geographic information systems, spatial database management, and land use planning. Suryani Amin was a Climate Adaptation Consultant of the World Bank Disaster Risk Management program in Jakarta. She has her Msi from University of Indonesia in Environmental Sociology Study and was doing research on resources mobilization of peasant organization. Previously, she was Coordinator to Climate Resilient City with the Mercy Corps Indonesia. Currently She is Community-Based Climate Change Adaptation Advisor to USAID-DAI Climate Change Adaptation and Resilience (APIK) Program. Hoferdy Zawani was part of consultant team of the World Bank Disaster Risk Management team of Jakarta office. He facilitated in policy discussion on urban resilience framework. Mr. Zawani has solid ground of understanding in access to water and sanitation services, slum alleviation, and land for the urban poor. He is currently pursuing graduate school at the University of Florida, Gainesville. Ruby Mangunsong is a Disaster Risk Management consultant in World Bank Office Jakarta. She earned her master degree in Sociology of Social Changes from Saint Petersburg State University, Russia. She supports the mainstreaming DRM, knowledge sharing and knowledge exchange between Indonesian National Disaster Management Authority (BNPB) and the World Bank. Prior to joining the World Bank, she assisted the Jakarta Tsunami Information Center with the UNESCO Office in Jakarta. The Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and www.gfdrr.org Recovery (GFDRR) is a global partnership that helps developing countries better understand and reduce their vulnerabilities to natural hazards and adapt to climate change. Working with over 400 local, national, regional, and international partners, GFDRR provides grant financing, technical assistance, training and knowledge sharing activities to mainstream disaster and climate risk management in policies and strategies. Managed by the World Bank, GFDRR is supported by 34 countries and 9 international organizations. ISBN 978-979-16876-9-0