Accomodating vs Disempowering the Poor:
Renewing and Revitalizing The Cities For Indonesia
Sri-Edi Swasono [*)]
We are witnessing how cities in Indonesia have grown more and more haphazardly. In addition the cities each lack specific characteristics and they do not have a clear role and function to the livelihood of the residents. Life in the cities has become increasingly tough and demands more human sacrifices. The large gap between the haves and have nots is the trait of many cities in Indonesia. This is not particularly an Indonesian issue as it is also prevalent in many cities in Asia and in Third World nations. The questions then becomes: how to transform the cities into comfortable, friendly and culturally unique ones that can become the pride of and bring about possessiveness to all the citizens. This is of course not a simple and easily resolved question.
Cities have often been developed without a sound city planning, in terms of their physical planning (planology and architectural planning) nor in terms of the socio-economic and socio-cultural dimensions. Even if such planning is designed, the cities have in reality departed from the planning framework. Cities have become the symbol and real form of the economic polarization that subsequently have turned into a social polarization with all the alarming consequences to the solidity of social integration. This, however, does not imply that urban planning should stop functioning and be abandoned. We must continue our endeavours to transform and revitalize the roles and functions of our cities, so that the cities can truly become places that are friendly, enjoyably and inspiring to their citizens to live in peace and in the pursuit of happiness.
***
National Development encompasses the establishment of an advanced and just society. Indonesia, specifically in terms of the socio-economic life, is committed to implement National Development on the basis of the spirit of mutualism and brotherhood as the foundation for the realization of social justice. This is stipulated in Indonesia’s constitution. Unfortunately, National Development that should have benefited all parties, has become a process that has created socio-economic and socio-cultural divergencies. National Development that should have been a process for the empowerment of the underclass has often turned into a process of disempowerment of the poor and weak. The poor and weak have mostly become the marginalized and then evicted, and in fact they have become alienated to those reaping the benefits. In short, a process of impoverishment is concurrent with city developments and renewals.
As I mentioned earlier, development that (unintendedly) brought about an economic polarization, was then transformed into a social polarization. The rich then were gaining the inclination to become exclusive, by developing luxuriant satellite cities with all of the lavish facilities, such as exclusive and luxurious hospitals, shopping centers and in fact schools as well. This ugly process never endingly continues. Thus the rich exclusive groups have found their necessary momentum to separate themselves from the slumps of the cities. We used to say: “The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting children”. Cities are becoming prone to social antagonism and conflicts. The alienated poor are becoming more marginalized and are in fact deemed and condemned as becoming problems and burdens of the cities.
The privileged rich have access to political and economic decision making, that have positioned them as the powerful decisive elite in socio-economic, socio-political, and socio-cultural life. This has exacerbated the social gaps, and further enforces the exploitatory process of transfer of wealth and ownership from the poor and weak to the rich rent seekers. The upperclass “cleptocrats” control the decision making within the urban governments.
***
Does it imply that those that are poor and weak have lost their role in the life of urban areas? Evidently not so. I had once explained to a large forum at one of the universities in the US that what I considered as just ordinary issues, but turned out to have shocked them. Let me repeat it as follows. I will start with the question: why can the poor workers of large and rich corporations sustain their life in the cities? The answer is that the grassroots economy (that includes the informal sector) sustainably provides low cost livelihood to these poor laborers. The low cost of living of the poor has made them able to survive and have attained a relatively high purchasing power parity from their low wages. Would it not mean that the grassroots economy, including the informal sector, such as the street vendors (PKLs) and the traditional smallholders markets has basically “subsidized” the abundant corporations that employ the low cost labors. The low cost economy at the grassroots level has become the foundation of economic strength for the macro economy. Unfortunately, government officials of the urban areas have tended to be biased against the poor, resulting in the informal sector having in fact been evicted without giving them alternative solutions. The economic democracy of Indonesia is not ideologically impartial to the weak, even the weak should be given privileges so as to enable them to articulate their strategic role in providing a living for the urban poor.
Urban governments will indeed be continually plagued by the problems of the poor people, of people that do not have jobs and the skills that will enable them to live productively in urban areas. I am referring to the urbanization that has been problematic since the birth of theories of development, that has never as yet been able to be resolved. One of the main critical causes of urbanization is the depressing life in rural areas that has given rise to the neon light attraction of big cities, as misleadingly shown in our television screens.
***
In the meantime the cities have an exploitatory nature towards the rural areas. The terms of trade of rural produces have constantly declined in the past 30 years. The cities are in powerful position to determine a low price for the produces of rural areas, whereas the rural people have become submissive without any bargaining power in accepting the urban unfair pricing of their produces. The rural people does not have adequate bargaining position for demanding a just economic transaction from the urban people. This is one of the most vivid illustration of the process of impoverishment to the poor and weak.
Urban development is not independent from development of rural areas. The National Development Planning of the Republic of Indonesia strategically deploys an integral approach to development. A balanced development between urban and rural areas is institutionally designed. There must be an equivalent interdependence between the rural area and urban areas. The question that then arises is: how can the urban areas empower the rural areas in the interest of harmonious life in the cities, and vice-versa. The problem is how cities need to be designed so that the cities can also function to revitalize themselves thereby concomitantly able to revitalize the rural areas in an effective manner. There will be no cities that are peaceful, comfortable and just if there is no mutualism and brotherhood between the rich and the poor and between the urban areas and rural areas.
We currently are all demanded by the World to realize the eight Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). [1)] How can we attain them and what are the functions of the urban and rural areas for attaining the eight MDGs? I hope this forum can think out these issues in the context of National Development.
For my Indonesian friends I like to present a little story as follows, I am sorry this one is in bahasa Indonesia:
“Alkisahada seekor kijang muda yang merumput. Di balik semak-semak mengintip seekor singa dan seekor serigala. Pada saat kijang lengah sekejap, meloncatlah singa dan serigala menyergap. Kijang rubuh oleh terkaman dua pemangsa. Singa bertanya kepada serigala, bagaimana kita membagi buruan kita. Serigala yang tahu diri menjawab, paha belakang ke muka bagian mu, cukuplah aku paha belakang dan ekornya. Singa menampar muka serigala sambil mengancam, apa katamu? Serigala cepat menjawab, baiklah cukup bagiku ekornya saja. Singa mengatakan begitulah sepatutnya”.
Without the principles of mutualism and brotherhood, as I have referred to above as the Indonesian paradigm of development, then justice is power.
Market fundamentalism and the free-market ideology will enhance injustices. The market has been idolized of being omniscient and omnipotent to regulate market transactions. The market has been crowned as being sovereign, marginalizing the people sovereignty.[2)] Some start to believe in “dethroning” money, the king of the market.[3)] Without these principles then the iron adagium will self-fulfilled: i.e. development will be eradicating the poor, not eradicating poverty. Why sites are easily available for modern luxurious estates and supermarkets, but are not so for low-cost housing and traditional smallholder markets?
Continuous disempowerment may create self-disempowerment and depleting social-capital of the underclass. Participatory development will easily become exploitatory endeavour if not accompanied by emancipatory bottom-up approach of empowerment. This will certainly give rise to an ideology that is based on class-struggle, which we have to strictly avoid
Halaman 1
[*)]Prof. Dr. Sri-Edi Swasono is a Senior Official and Advisor to the Minister of National Development Planning/BAPPENAS, Republic of Indonesia and a Member of the Indonesian Legislature (MPR-RI). Paper presented at the Conference on “Transforming Asia Cities”, Delft University of Technology in cooperation with the Erasmushuis in Jakarta, Jakarta, December 17, 2003-red
[1)]Eight Millennium Development Goals: (1) Eradication of extreme poverty and hunger; (2) Achieve universal primary education; (3) Promote gender equality and empower women; (4) Reduce child mortality; (5) Improve maternal health; (6) Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases; (7) Ensure environmental sustainability: land and air; (8) Develop a global partnership for development: debt sustainability, Human Development Report, UNDP, 2003.
[2)]The market will not be capable of performing self-regulatory function to overcome economic polarization and other extreme structural imbalances. The ‘invisible hand’ of the market has turned into ‘the dirty hand’. The market must be managed to prevent the emergence of ‘the winner-take-all society’, see Sri-Edi Swasono, Ekspose Ekonomika: Globalisme dan Kompetensi Sarjana Ekonomi, (Pustep-UGM, 2003), pp. 21-58, 111-117; “... the market is assiduous servant of the wealthy but indifferent servant of the poor… (free) market system promote amorality … “, Robert Heilbroner and Lester C. Thurow, Economic Explained (New York: Simon Schuster, 1994) pp. 21-22; and Sri-Edi Swasono, loc. cit.
[3)]Jan Tinbergen, “Foreword” dalam Albert Tévoédjrè, Poverty: Wealth and Mankind (Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1978) page ix, Tévoédjrè wrote about “Dethroning Money”: The lion that kills is the lion that does not roar. He is like money, which strangles us without noise (Tswana proverb), page 1.