Accepted Manuscript
Title: Resilience Assessment on Coastline Changes and Urban Settlements: A Case
Study in Seribu Islands, Indonesia
Authors: A.R. Farhan, S. Lim
PII:
S0964-5691(10)00213-9
DOI:
10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2010.12.003
Reference:
OCMA 2805
To appear in:
Ocean and Coastal Management
Received Date: 11 August 2010
Revised Date:
5 December 2010
Accepted Date: 5 December 2010
Please cite this article as: Farhan AR, Lim S. Resilience Assessment on Coastline Changes and Urban
Settlements: A Case Study in Seribu Islands, Indonesia, Ocean and Coastal Management (2010), doi:
10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2010.12.003
This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to
our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo
copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please
note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all
legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
Resilience Assessment on Coastline Changes and Urban Settlements: A Case
Study in Seribu Islands, Indonesia
Farhan, A.R1, 2 and Lim, S1
1
School of Surveying and Spatial Information System
Engineering Faculty, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
2
Research Center for Marine Technology, Agency for Marine Affairs and Fisheries
Research, Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries Republic of Indonesia
Email: [email protected]
Abstract
The sustainable development in the ocean and costal areas has been an issue
for the archipelago nation. Since two decades ago, some archipelago nations have
attempted to implement the concept of both scientifically and politically sounding
sustainability. The vulnerability assessment is one of the methods that are being used
to measure the ocean and coastal sustainability in order to have better evaluation and
redesign of the land development as well as policy making. Most of the vulnerability
assessment has been conducted based on pressures, damages and changes that involve
in the region. A common understanding of the vulnerability assessment is that there
are three aspects to be considered: hazards, resilience and damages. These three
aspects must be well defined at first in order to have better indicators or sub-indices
for the vulnerability index. There are several issues and factors that should be
considered before performing the vulnerability assessment. Firstly, each country has
different coastal characteristics due to a different geologic process. Secondly, the
three aspects of the vulnerability (i.e. hazards, resilience and damages) are impacting
on each country at a different scale. Thirdly, the vulnerability of a small island region
is different from that of a large island region. Finally, policies and regulations vary in
each country.
From the data analysis results, it is found that the urban settlement in Seribu
Islands is one of the resilient factors in addition to the geological and
geomorphological conditions. The resilience factors in Seribu Islands are classified
into four categories: 1) settlements area, 2) population density, 3) hard infrastructure
such as airfields, ports and roads, 4) geological process such as abrasion and erosion.
Based on the island characteristics of Seribu Islands, a unique vulnerability index that
fits to this locality is developed. It is shown that the vulnerability index developed in
this study can measure the resilience of Seribu Islands. In addition to the
aforementioned resilience factors, the unique geographical condition and the
geological stability in Seribu Islands made the outer islands become a barrier from
oceanographic conditions and made the inner islands protected. However, the
population growth made significant changes in terms of ecology, water, sanitation and
pollution within the region.
Key Words: sustainable development, vulnerability, policy making, resilience
Introduction
Since the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, the “sustainable
development” has been taken as the highest priority for the ocean and coastal
management around the world. The necessity of the sustainable development is more
evident today due to the issues and facts about the global climate change. The
sustainable development means the development that meets the needs of the present
without deprecating the environment for the forthcoming generation (UNCED,
1996)1. The sustainability issues related to small islands were also addressed in the
Earth Summit 1992 under Chapter 17, Agenda 21. These issues were the main focus
1
UNCED: http://www.un.org/geninfo/bp/envirp3.html
of the Global Conference on the Sustainable Development of Small Island
Developing States which was held in Barbados in 19942 with the main concern that a
small island region is part of the global ocean network and usually is more vulnerable
than the main islands.
Indonesia as an archipelagic country with many small island regions has
attempted to adopt the sustainable development framework though Integrated Coastal
Zone Management (ICZM), which has been activated under the Indonesian
Cooperation Law, Act No. 27 in 2007.
At present, how to quantify the sustainable development for the coastal and
island management is a critical problem. Generally, the main issues of ICZM in
Indonesia are as stated by Farhan and Lim (2010):
• Policy and financial issues: highly agricultural (Sukardjo, 2002), lack of policy
and inconsistency.
• Environmental issues: overfishing and overexploitation of natural resources
(Sukardjo, 2002), erosion, abrasion, pollution, losing and declining biodiversity
and mismanagement.
• Socio-economic issues: emphasis on new infrastructure development regardless of
the consequences to the environment rather than optimising the exiting
infrastructure, poverty, inexpedient houses, lack of knowledge, mostly using
traditional (somewhat destructive) fishing method.
• Observation, monitoring and evaluation issues: only few ocean and coastal
observation equipment (such as oceanographic buoy, tidal gauge, etc)
One of the methods to measure the sustainability is to assess the vulnerability.
The vulnerability concept has been an influential tool to describe the relationship
between physical, biological, and social systems, economy systems as well as policy
systems for assisting the decision maker to enhance the prosperity by reducing the
risks or hazards (Adger, 2006). The term of vulnerability is a widely accepted concept
that can be summarized as “the tendency of something to be damaged” and the
opposite of this is the resilience, which means “the ability to resist and/or recover
from the damage” (Kaly et al, 2002).
Most of nations have developed their own vulnerability index (Gornitz, 1991;
Gornitz et al, 2001; Gornitz, 2002; Jackson et al., 2004; Adger, 2006; Goklany, 2007;
Harvey and Woodroffe, 2008; Meur-Férec et al, 2008; Nicholls et al, 2008;
Szlafsztein and Sterr, 2007; Woodroffe, 2008). As a result, different vulnerability
indices show different pressures, changes and mitigations depending on their coastal
characteristics.
A comparison method on how to measure global vulnerability known as seven
stages has been developed by Harvey and Woodroffe (2008), however, those stages in
developing countries must be driven by well-built policies in order to have better
evaluation. On the other hand, South Pacific Applied Geosciences Commission
(SOPAC)3 under United Nation Environment Program (UNEP) focused on the Small
Island Developing States (SIDS) by using 50 indicators and 10 sub-indices. This
environmental vulnerability index (EVI) program already measured and produced
vulnerability values of all small islands’ developing states. However, instead of using
individual national/local data, EVI can measure and assess only the vulnerability
based on the impact and the perspective of the global network data. From SOPAC
2
3
UNCLEF: http://www.unclef.com/en/globalissues/environment/
SOPAC: www.vulnerabilityindex.net
technical report in 2004, there are three aspects that must be considered in terms of
vulnerability: the resilience, the occurrence of hazards, and the damages.
In view of the fact that Indonesia has more than 17,000 islands, the
measurement of vulnerability indices should be classified based on the geographical
condition of the main islands (Sumatra, Java, Bali, Kalimantan, Sulawesi, Maluku and
Papua) and the small islands, which according to Indonesian Cooperation Law, Act
27 of 2007, the definition of a small island is an island of an area less than 2,000
square kilometers. Generally, based on geological characteristics (van Bemmelen,
1949; E. Bird and Ongkosongo, 1980), most of small islands in Indonesian region
formed in carbonate and atoll form with corals (both hard and soft corals).
Geographically, small islands regions in Indonesia can be divided into two
categories (Figure 1): inner small islands (i.e. near the main islands) and outer islands
(i.e. far from the main islands or isolated or near another country’s boundaries).
From the respective conditions, their characteristics as well as their problems
of inner islands and outer islands can be described as follows:
a) Socio-Economic Status
Mostly inner islands have a better economic status than outer islands, however, their
infrastructure such as electricity and water becomes the common problem for both
inner and outer islands. In addition, the development of infrastructure in outer islands
is very slow in progress e.g. education in outer islands is difficult to obtain, not to
mention lack of healthcare institutions and fresh water. Most of the local communities
in outer islands are fishermen. This is different from inner islands because inner
islands are located near the main islands and as a result many of the local
communities are working in the main islands.
b) State Laws
Outer islands usually lack of state laws than inner islands. The local communities in
outer islands are based on and lived by local customs rather than state laws. This
situation has made the local communities become unaware of coastal environment
and destructive to the environment e.g. the development of housing by using coral and
deforestation. Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) Fishing is higher in outer
islands, simply because there are no enforcement officers in those areas.
c) Security
The security issues in inner islands are better than those of outer islands. The more
isolated the less predictable security issues. This situation also affects the identity of
the local communities that could bring more problems for Indonesia as archipelagic
states.
From the small island characteristics given above, the vulnerability in
Indonesia must be determined based on the characteristics of each island region and
the classification of the indices must be made and evaluated in order to have a better
and inclusive vulnerability index.
This paper aims to present the resilience assessment in one of the small island
regions in Indonesia, namely Seribu Islands, with the constraint on the urban
settlements by using Geographic Information Systems (GIS). The study area is
focused on the five urban islands: Pari, Pramuka, Panggang, Tidung Besar and Tidung
Kecil. The selection of Seribu islands is based on the stability of geological events in
the region and it is necessary to measure the resilience that is influenced by the urban
pressure.
Study area
Seribu Islands can be considered as an inner island region which is located 30
kilometers away from the north of Jakarta, Indonesia (Figure.2) and consists of the
Java Sea and 96 islands with the total area approximately 7,200 square kilometers and
the population is 22,705 people (Center of Indonesia-Statistic, 2009).
Administratively the Seribu Islands region is divided into 2 districts and 6 villages.
Most of the people live only in the main 11 islands and one of the main islands is
Pramuka Island as the center of the local government of the Seribu Islands region.
The population of the Seribu Islands region is 4,920 families and 65% of them are
living in Panggang Island, Pramuka Island, Kelapa Island, Kelapa Dua Island and
Harapan Island.
From the Center of Indonesia-Statistic (2009), Seribu Islands have an average
slope of 15% with the height of less than 2 meters below the sea surface and are
influenced by the tidal process within 15 meters. The wind condition in Seribu Islands
is influenced by the monsoon that can be classified as East Monsoon (DecemberMarch) and West Monsoon (June-September) with the average wind speed of 7-20
knots. Wet seasons usually occur from November to April with the annual rainfall
approximately 1,700 mm and the number of raining days ranges between 10-20
days/month. Air temperature in Seribu Islands is ranging between 26.5-28.5OC with
the humidity 75-99% and the average air pressure 1,009-1,011 mb.
Generally, Seribu Islands have the surface current with the maximum speed of
0.5 m/s and the sea wave height between 0.5-1.75 m and the sea temperature between
25.3-31.2OC with the sea depth between 0-60 m. The land use in Seribu Islands can
be classified into five categories: housing (27.21%), industry (23.30%), government
and private office (7.85%), farming (24.34%) and others (17.30%).
After Pleistocene era, the geological condition in Seribu Islands (van
Bemmelen, 1949) was formed from calcium stone, coral/sand and sediment from Java
Island and Java Sea that consists of the composition of metamorphic and igneous rock
followed by epyclastic sediment, limestone and clay sediment that became the genesis
of coral reef. The soil type that occurred in Seribu Islands is sandy coral reflecting the
weathering process of limestone with thickness of less than 1 m and in some islands it
can attain 5 m. In some islands soft organic soil can be found from the weathering
process of plants especially islands that enrich of mangrove. The geology in Seribu
Islands region are stable and coral reef are well preserved because micro-tidal effects
and the flank of islands make the west/east monsoon’s influence weak as described by
Umbgrove (1949).
Although the region is very close to the capital city of Indonesia, Seribu
Islands are a typical example that lacks of concept, design, planning and development.
Seribu Islands have turned out to be overburden from the increased population
(Verstappen, 1988), pollution (oil spill in Pabelokan Island by a multinational oil
company), Illegal Unregulated and Unreported Fishing (IUUF) and also marine debris
from seven major rivers in Jakarta Bay (E. Bird and Ongkosongo, 1980).
1.1. Legal and jurisdictional framework in Seribu Islands
Regulations and laws of Seribu Islands have been enacted by the governor of
Jakarta for the first time in 1962 under the local government decree No. 7 of 1962.
These regulations only focus on the coral reef exploitation in Seribu Islands, which is
followed by the land use regulation (1969), the limitation of fishing near coral reef
(1970), the regulation on fishing net (1970) and the regulations and laws for land use
and property (1972 and1970). After Indonesia ratified the 1982 United Convention on
the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), it should be noted that 108,000 hectares in Seribu
Islands became the natural conservation area under the Ministry of Agriculture decree
on October 10th, 1982. This regulation is then followed by the regulation on the zone
area of conservation by the Ministry of Forestry decree (1986, 1995, 2000, 2002).
Ultimately, Seribu Islands now hold 107,489 hectares of the conservation area.
Principally, the regional authorities must follow Indonesian cooperation law
Act No. 27 as legal aspect in term of ocean and coastal management, which have
eleven principles in terms of the ocean and coastal management: sustainability,
reliability, integrity, legal certainty, partnership, balanced distribution, public
participants, openness, decentralisation, accountability and fairness. In addition, the
ocean and coastal management in Indonesia must have the following principal:
a. Protection, conservation, rehabilitation, utilization and enrichment of coastal
natural resources and small islands.
b. Balanced partnership between central government and regional authorities.
c. Enhancement of public participants and government institutions as well as the
active involvement from local communities in the coastal and small islands
regarding the natural resource management.
d. Enhancement of socio-economic cultures of local communities.
1.2. Resilience Assessment of Seribu Islands
Many studies have been conducted to identify the environmental pressure
trends in the region of Seribu Islands. These studies showed that Seribu Islands have
been posing serious problems such as natural hazards (Ongkosongo, 1982), urban
pressure (Verstappen, 1988), climate change impact (Brown and Suharsono, 1990),
socio-economic pressure (Tomascik, Suharsono, & Mah, 1994; Fauzi and Anggraini
Buchary, 2002; Crawford et al, 2006) and coral damage (Edinger and Browne, 2000;
Cleary et al, 2006; Rachello-Dolmen and Cleary, 2007). However, these studies only
measured the environmental pressure (both hazards and damages) without measuring
the resilience or the ability to withstand the recovery process. Therefore it is validate
to ask a question: will Seribu Islands endure against urban settlements?
Apart from analyzing the environmental pressure, resilience or recovery time
as well as the frequency of damages and hazards must be identified and measured in
order to have a better evaluation on the vulnerability index (Goklany, 2007). There
are several issues and factors that must be considered before performing the
vulnerability assessment. Firstly, each country has different coastal characteristics due
to a different geologic process that was involved in each country. Secondly, the three
aspects of the vulnerability (i.e. hazards, resilience and damages) are impacting on
each country at a different scale. Thirdly, the vulnerability of a small island region is
different from that of a large island region. Finally, policies and regulations vary in
each country.
Landscapes defined as “the appearance of the land, including its shapes,
texture and color” (Morris and Therivel, 2001), must be determined and evaluated so
that the result can be used as a base for the vulnerability in that region. In Seribu
Islands, there are four factors that contribute to the landscape condition:
• Physical parameters e.g. geology, geomorphology, fresh water, and soil.
• Population growth.
• Anthropogenic/human induced parameters e.g. land use and infrastructure
(buildings, ports and roads).
• Oceanographic/climate parameters e.g. wave, tidal, currents, rainfall, and dry
seasons.
As the study area is an inner island surrounded by two main islands (Java and
Sumatra)
and
influenced
by
micro-tidal
(Verstappen,
1988),
the
oceanographic/climate factor is ignored in this study. Evaluation on each factor as
well as the relationships between the factors must be examined thoroughly in order to
have better knowledge on the condition of landscapes and to discover the resilience in
that region.
Methodology
To have a better understanding of coastal changes in Seribu Islands, relevant
datasets such as topographic maps, remote sensing images and geology maps have
been analyzed and evaluated on the resilient condition in urban islands as described in
Figure 3. All datasets that are analysed using the ArcGIS software include:
• Topographic maps produced in 1911 and 1913 by the Royal Tropical Institute,
Amsterdam.
• Demographic data and statistics of Seribu Islands from 1980 – 2009, produced by
the Centre of Indonesia Statistic (BPS Indonesia).
• Aerial photographs taken in 1989 by the Marine and Agriculture Office of
Thousand Island Government Administration (Indonesia).
• Topographic maps produced in 1999 by the National Coordination for Survey and
Mapping (BAKOSURTANAL, Indonesia).
• Formosat 2 satellite imagery taken in 2006 and 2007, obtained from the Agency
for the Assessment and Application of Technology (BPPT, Indonesia).
Figure 3 shows that there are three stages to develop the vulnerability index in
the Seribu Islands region. In Stage 1 (data preparation), topographic maps, aerial
photos and satellite imagery are rectified and projected according to the Indonesian
Ground Control Point (GCP) reference in the region. Then the satellite imagery from
Formosat Satellite is analysed based on Band 4 (near infrared), Band 1 (blue), Band 2
(green) to perform the spatial analysis in Stage 2.
In Stage 2 (data analysis), all maps and satellite imagery are converted to the
vector format in order to ease the spatial analysis. Topographic maps and aerial
photos are digitized, while the principal component analysis is followed by the
reclassification that uses the satellite imagery in order to separate the objects from the
land and the ocean. The secondary datasets (demography, geomorphology and
geology) are used as a reference and input into the reclassification function to obtain
more accurate interpretation of the objects and boundaries. Finally, the overlay
function is used to have a better understanding about the changes in the region.
In order to develop the vulnerability index, the datasets are divided into five
themes and are analysed separately: coastline changes, the island development,
demography, geology and geology.
A series of computation processes is constructed in order to have a scoring
mechanism for the vulnerability index. The weighting process as well as the scoring
process are developed and performed in order to evaluate the vulnerability because
there is no reference to the vulnerability in Indonesia nor in any archipelagic states.
Then the classification is performed based on the significant changes in each island
and the indicators are assigned based on the highest and the lowest values of the
changes. Finally, the scoring process will be from 1 – 5 and the total VI will be
calculated based on the average of the total indicators.
Results and Discussion
The comparison results from three maps of the years 1913, 1999 and 2007,
show that urban islands in the Seribu Islands region such as Tidung Besar, Tidung
Kecil, Pramuka, Panggang, Harapan and Kelapa had significantly changed in relation
with the population growth. However, instead of becoming more vulnerable, the
population pressure has made each island more resilient in terms of the geological
conditions. The most significant change is resulted from the population growth in
Tidung Besar Island (Figure 4) where its area expanded from 683,537 m2 in 1913 to
670,197 m2 in 1999 and became 619,444 m2 in 2007. This is particularly evident in
northern and southern areas of the island. The highest abrasion occurred in southwest
and southeast directions, as resulted from the deforestation of mangrove.
Figure 5 shows that the area of Tidung Kecil in 1913 was 179,512 m2 and
increased to 246,250 m2 in 1999 due to a reclamation process from the population
growth and became 218,512 m2 in 2007. However, the three small islands in the
northern and eastern areas that existed in 1913 vanished completely by 1999. The
abrasion in Tidung Kecil occurred mostly in the southeast part of the island and a
slight abrasion on the eastern part of the island is recognized. Coastal communities
tend to build their houses on the northern part of the island.
Pari Island and its surrounding islands (Figure 6) show that their area of
542,853 m2 in 1913 expanded to the northern part of the island and became 564,262
m2 in 1999. However, a significant abrasion in the eastern and western areas of the
island has reduced the area to 523,593 m2 by year 2007. Kongsi Timur Island as well
as Tikus Island show a significant change too. A strong abrasion from the northeast
direction made a significant impact on their coastal shape. However, this condition
did not implicate coastlines of Kongsi Barat Island, Kongsi Tengah Island, Tengah
Island and Burung Island. It turned out that those three islands have expanded by year
2007.
Pramuka Island and its surrounding islands (Panggang Island and Karya
Island) show only a slight change on their coastlines (Figure 7). Pramuka and Karya
Island have made the coastline more rigid in those areas. A slight change occurred in
the southern part of Panggang Island due to the deforestation of mangrove area, this
made area of Panggang Island has reduced from 122,465 m2 in 1999 to 124,573 m2 by
year 2007. However, the area of Karya Island has expanded from 75,728 m2 in 1999
to 82,660 m2 by year 2007 and Pramuka Island also expanded from 216,6453 m2 in
1999 to 222,037 by year 2007 because of ports development at western part of the
island and a slight abrasion occurred only on the western and southern part of the
island. The development of a floating marine aquaculture in the western part of
Panggang Islands in 2007 has become one of significant incomes for the whole
region.
More significant changes are evident on the coastlines of Harapan Island and
Kelapa Island. Both coastlines have expanded due to the housing development and
infrastructure (Figure 8). The government connected these two islands in 1990s,
followed by the development of the district office in the southern part of these two
islands, which expanded the area in year 2007 until now. Two small islands emerged
in the southern part of Kelapa Island as resulted from the connection of the two
islands (Kelapa and Harapan) and created a silting-up process. In these two small
islands, mangrove has been planted by coastal communities who utilised the islands
as a marine aquaculture area. This figure also shows that the abrasion in Panjang
Island in the southwest direction, while the development of Panjang Besar Islands
begun in 2000s as an airfield, has made the coastline of this island slightly changed.
Kelapa Dua Island also created a reclamation process as resulted by the housing
development in that island.
Urban settlements, population density and hard infrastructure in the study area
significantly influenced the resilience i.e. prevented or slowed down the weathering
process. The more islands have been covered by the three factors, the more the islands
are resistant against the weathering process as well as the oceanographic process
(such as waves and tides) and the geological process (e.g abrasion) as seen in Table 1.
Based on the island characteristics of Seribu Islands, a unique vulnerability index that
fits to this locality is developed in Table 2.
The results from this study are preliminary because the vulnerability index is
measured only on the urban islands, however, it proved that the constructions and
robust developments in Seribu Islands reduced the weathering process. These
observations on the coastal line show that the impact on populated islands is minor in
Pramuka Island (Figure 9), this shown on the calculation of vulnerability index in
table 3. Based on Pethick and Crooks (2000), the sustainability depends on the period
of recovery from any disturbance. In that sense, the human factor in Seribu Islands is
a resilience factor.
In addition, the sustainable development of coastal zones must have a proper
coordination on environmental, socio-cultural, and institutional aspects as well as
regulations and laws. Consequently, the proposed vulnerability index will be adjusted
accordingly in the future.
Conclusions
From the spatial analysis results, it can be summarized that the urban
settlement in Seribu Islands is considered as one of the resilient factors in addition to
the geological and geomorphological conditions. The resilience factors in Seribu
Islands are classified into four categories: 1) settlements area, 2) population density,
3) hard infrastructure such as airfields, ports and roads, 4) geological process such as
abrasion and erosion.
It is shown that the vulnerability index developed in this study can measure
the resilience of Seribu Islands. In addition to the aforementioned resilience factors,
the unique geographical condition and the geological stability in Seribu Islands made
the outer islands become a barrier from oceanographic conditions and made the inner
islands protected. However, the impact of population made significant changes in
terms of ecology, water, sanitation and pollution within the region.
In order to measure the sustainable development more accurately, several
components were studied. Firstly, the weathering process assessment is a significant
input to a comparison between the islands with a strong resilience and the islands with
a low resilience. The rainfall data, the dry season data as well as the oceanographic
data must be included in the analysis. This assessment can also be used to study
paleo-climate that influenced the region. Secondly, the policies in the region that
regulated both the central government and the local government in terms of the
coastal development and management must be compared comprehensively in order to
have better and suitable policies for each coastal region in Indonesia. Thirdly, a better
appraisal of the environmental changes is essential in order to have better evaluation
in the region. Lastly, integrated assessment on geology/geomorphology, geography,
policy and environment must be performed and analysed in order to have detailed and
accurate vulnerability assessment on the region.
Acknowledgement
The authors would like to acknowledge the support of Australian
Development Scholarship (AusAID) in Indonesia, the support of Marine and
Agriculture Office of Thousand Island Government Administration (Indonesia), the
Agency for Assessment and Application of Technology (BPPT/Indonesia), the Center
of Indonesia-Statistic (Indonesia) and the Royal Tropical Institute (Amsterdam).
References
Adger, W., 2006. Vulnerability. Global Environmental Change, 16(3), 268-281.
Badan Pusat Statistic Indonesia/The Center of Indonesia-Statistic. Kepulauan Seribu
Dalam Angka (1983-2009). Indonesian Government.
van Bemmelen, R. W., 1949. The geology of Indonesia (Vol. 1). The Hague:Govt.
Printing Office.
Bird, E., Ongkosongo, O., 1980. Environmental changes on the coasts of Indonesia.
The United Nation University.
Brown, B., Suharsono., 1990. Damage and recovery of coral reefs affected by El Niño
related seawater warming in the Thousand Islands, Indonesia. Coral Reefs,
8(4), 163-170.
Cleary, D., Suharsono., Hoeksema, B., 2006. Coral diversity across a disturbance
gradient in the Pulau Seribu reef complex off Jakarta, Indonesia. Biodiversity
and Conservation, 15(11), 3653-3674.
Crawford, B., Kasmidi, M., Korompis, F., Pollnac, R., 2006. Factors influencing
progress in establishing community-based marine protected areas in Indonesia.
Coastal Management, 34(1), 39-64.
Earth Summit-United Nation Conference on Environmental and Development.
Retrieved July 22, 2009, from http://www.un.org/geninfo/bp/enviro.html
Edinger, E., Browne, D., 2000. Continental seas of western Indonesia. Seas at the
millennium - an environmental evaluation - Volume 2, 381-404.
Environmental Vulnerability Index (EVI) by South Pacific Applied Geoscience
Commission. Retrieved July 22, 2009, from
http://www.vulnerabilityindex.net/
Farhan, A., Lim, S., 2010. Integrated coastal zone management towards Indonesia
global ocean observing system (INA-GOOS): Review and recommendation.
Ocean and Coastal Management, 53(8), 421-427.
doi:10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2010.06.015
Fauzi, A., Anggraini Buchary, E., 2002. A socioeconomic perspective of
environmental degradation at Kepulauan Seribu Marine National Park,
Indonesia. Coastal Management, 30(2), 167-181.
Global Issues at the United Nations. Retrieved October 7, 2010, from
http://www.unclef.com/en/globalissues/environment/
Goklany, I., 2007. Integrated strategies to reduce vulnerability and advance
adaptation, mitigation, and sustainable development. Mitigation and
Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 12(5), 755-786.
Gornitz, V., 1991. Global coastal hazards from future sea level rise. Global and
Planetary Change, 3(4), 379-398.
Gornitz, V., 2002. Sea level rise in the New York city metropolitan area. In Solutions
to Coastal Disasters 2002, pp. 421-434.
Gornitz, V., Couch, S., Hartig, E., 2001. Impacts of sea level rise in the New York
City metropolitan area. Global and Planetary Change, 32(1), 61-88.
Harvey, N., Woodroffe, C., 2008. Australian approaches to coastal vulnerability
assessment. Sustainability Science, 3(1), 67-87.
Jackson, L., Bird, S., Matheny, R., O'Neill, R., White, D., Boesch, K., Koviach, J.,
2004. A regional approach to projecting land-use change and resulting
ecological vulnerability. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 94(1-3),
231-248.
Kaly, U., Pratt, C., Howorth, R., 2002. A framework for managing environmental
vulnerability in small island developing states. Development Bulletin, 58, 3338.
Meur-Férec, C., Deboudt, P., Morel, V., 2008. Coastal risks in France: An integrated
method for evaluating vulnerability. Journal of Coastal Research, 24(2
SUPPL. B), 178-189.
Morris, P., Therivel, R., 2001. Methods of Environmental Impact Asessment. Natural
and built environment series. London:Spon.
Nicholls, R., Wong, P., Burkett, V., Woodroffe, C., Hay, J., 2008. Climate change and
coastal vulnerability assessment: Scenarios for integrated assessment.
Sustainability Science, 3(1), 89-102.
Ongkosongo, O., 1982. The nature of coastline changes in Indonesia. Indonesian
Journal of Geography, 12(43), 1-22.
Pethick, J., Crooks, S., 2000. Development of a coastal vulnerability index: A
geomorphological perspective. Environmental Conservation, 27(4), 359-367.
Rachello-Dolmen, P., Cleary, D., 2007. Relating coral species traits to environmental
conditions in the Jakarta Bay/Pulau Seribu reef system, Indonesia. Estuarine,
Coastal and Shelf Science, 73(3-4), 816-826.
Sukardjo, S., 2002. Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) in Indonesia: A
view from a mangrove ecologist. Southeast Asian Studies, 40(2), 200-218.
Szlafsztein, C., Sterr, H., 2007. A GIS-based vulnerability assessment of coastal
natural hazards, state of Pará, Brazil. Journal of Coastal Conservation, 11(1),
53-66.
Tomascik, T., Suharsono, Mah, A., 1994. Case histories: a historical perspective of
the natural and anthropogenic impacts in the Indonesian Archipelago with a
focus on the Kepulauan Seribu, Java Sea. Proceedings of the colloquium on
global aspects of coral reefs, Miami, 1993, 304-310.
Umbgrove, J. H. F., 1949. Structural history of the East Indies. Cambridge :
Cambridge University Press.
Verstappen, H., 1988. Old and new observations on coastal changes of Jakarta Bay:
an example of trends in urban stress on coastal environments. Journal of
Coastal Research, 4(4), 573-587.
Woodroffe, C., 2008. Reef-island topography and the vulnerability of atolls to sealevel rise. Global and Planetary Change, 62(1-2), 77-96.
Highlights
•
•
•
•
Problems and characteristic on small islands in Indonesia.
Human factor in Seribu Islands region has made the region more resilient.
Coastline changes on populated islands in Seribu Islands region depends on the
settlements. Area, population, the development of infrastructures and geological
process.
Calculation on vulnerability index in Seribu islands Region on populated Islands as an
example.
Parameters/indicators
Significance
Calculation method
Weathering
process
Settlements area
Settlements area that increased the Settlements area/total
resilience of the region
area * 100%
None - Low
Population density
The more dense, the more
Ln (Total population in None - Low
development of settlements area in one island/wide area of
the region
island)
Hard infrastructure
Infrastructure that influenced the
impact of the resilience
Total area of
None - Low
infrastructure/total area
of island *100%
Geological process
The occurrence of
abrasion/erosion in the area
Total area of abrasion Low-high
and erosion/total area *
100%
Table 1. Indicators and calculation method for Seribu Islands region.
Parameters/indicators
Vulnerability
Very Low
Low
Medium
High
Very High
>50%
40%-30%
30%-20%
20%-10%
<10%
Population density
>10
7-9
7-5
5-0
0
Hard infrastructure
>30%
20%-30%
10-20%
5%-10%
0
Geological process
<10%
10%-20%
20%-30%
30%-40%
>50%
1
2
3
4
5
Settlements area
Vulnerability Index score
Table 2. Vulnerability indexes for Seribu Islands region
Total
104384.85 m2
Calculation
47%
V Indicator
Low
Population density
(Population 2009)
1015 people
5.4
Medium
Hard infrastructure
15974.59 m2
7.194554
High
Geological Process
5055.27 m2
2.276767
Low
Settlements area
Total V Index
2.25
(Low)
VI will be scored 1- 5 according table 2 (very low = 1, low = 2, medium = 3, high = 4 and very high = 5)
Total VI = Average (Settlement area +Population density + Hard Infrastructure + Geology Process)
Table 3. Vulnerability on Pramuka Island
S
T
A
G
E
Topographic Map
Aerial photo
Satellite
Imagery
Indonesia GCP
Reference
1
S
T
A
G
E
Image Analysis
Digitising
Spatial Analysis
Vector Overlay
2
SPATIAL DATA ANALYSIS
S
T
A
G
E
Coastlines
Changes
Islands
Development
Geomorphology
Demographic
Geology
3
VULNERABILITY ANALYSIS
Figure 3. Methodology
Secondary Data:
Demographic data
Geology
Geomorphology