• Rapid Assessment of Urban PNPM Implementation for Extended Period

    The findings of this study indicate that the urban slum upgrading program has had positive results. This study concludes that the PLPBK program has succeeded in dealing with infrastructure problems in slum areas…


This study was conducted to evaluate the results of the Community-Based Settlement Environment Management (PLPBK) program in improving the condition of slum areas in urban areas and to evaluate the Community-Based Disaster Risk Reduction (PRBBK) program in reducing the risk of flood disasters. The study focused on three aspects of evaluation, namely (i) the results of PLPBK in supporting slum management and disaster risk reduction for the target community; (ii) the effectiveness of specific interventions from the perspective of the community and local government; (ii) utilization and maintenance of PNPM Urban infrastructure built in the 2012-2014 period. This study uses a qualitative case study method. Field data mining was carried out in six sub-districts in Yogyakarta, Banjarmasin and Bima in February 2019.

The findings of this study indicate that the urban slum upgrading program has had positive results. This study concludes that the PLPBK program has succeeded in dealing with infrastructure problems in slum areas such as uninhabitable houses (RTLH), poor access, and minimal sanitation and drainage. At the same time the program has also encouraged intangible dimensions for residents such as strengthening social relations, establishing social relations with residents outside the slum areas, and increasing livelihood choices for residents.

Infrastructure integration in one area has expanded the impact of the slum upgrading program on the intangible aspects of residents’ lives. This research identifies four factors that influence better integration and implementation of infrastructure integration. These four things are (i) PLPBK policies that facilitate the integration process itself; (ii) the capacity and strategy of actors (program implementers) in carrying out program planning and outreach; (iii) the level of trust and collectivity of the community; (iv) an enabling policy environment that provides a reference for slum upgrading programs and activities.

Unlike the PLPBK which showed positive results in dealing with problems in slum areas, this study revealed that the PRBBK program was not very effective in reducing the risk of flash floods in Bima. This program only has a limited impact on strengthening the capacity and resilience of residents in dealing with, adapting, and recovering from flood disasters. It is difficult for the program to mitigate residents from the risk of flash floods in Bima due to flooding. CBDRM framework and institutions need to be strengthened in such a way that the program can formulate comprehensive steps in improving drainage management, building dams, improving governance, evaluating land use plans and governor policies.

This evaluation also suggests a number of areas where the slum upgrading program can be improved to ensure infrastructure integration and maximize its impact, both tangible and intangible. Some of the recommendation points put forward are that the program should pay attention to four policy requirements in program implementation which consist of, (i) infrastructure integration in one priority area; (ii) the capabilities and strategies of implementing actors in adapting the slum area management standards from the Ministry of PUPR to the local context; (iii) better socialization and participation strategies for the implementation of housing rehabilitation projects; (iv) legal uncertainty reform; (v) in conditions where social capital does not exist or is weak, it is necessary to have facilitation at all levels to bring about collectivity among residents and between local residents and outsiders.

This study also warns that the increase in land and accommodation prices has occurred as a consequence of the slum upgrading program. This program is expected to find a solution to this risk, because this price increase can exclude poor households and migrants from upgraded areas.


  • Year


  • Focus Activity

    Monitoring & Evaluasi

  • Location Study

    Enam kelurahan di Yogyakarta, Banjarmasin, dan Bima

  • Coordinator Study

    Yulia Indrawati Sari (Koord. Studi); Hilda Arum Nurbayyanti (Asisten Koord. Studi)

  • Team Research

    Aprilia Ambarwati, Bewanti Dahani,Fadhli Ilhami, Faisal Setianzah, Hilda Arum Nurbayyanti, Muklas Aji Setiawan, Mulyana, Nofalia Nurfitriani dan Panji Ardiansyah.