3207-6042-2-PB

Bisnis & Birokrasi, Jurnal Ilmu Administrasi dan OrganisasiInternational Journal of Administrative Science & Organization, September 2013 Volume 20, Number 3

ISSN 0854 - 3844, Accredited by DIKTI Kemendiknas RI No : 64a/DIKTI/Kep/2010

INTRODUCTION

Transportation is vital in the process of developing a nation. At this moment, transportation system has become one of the most vital foundations of economy, particularly since the public today is pressed to have a high mobility in everyday’s life. Tamin (2000) stated that transportation infrastructures play two main roles, namely as a helping tool in directing development in urban area, and as infrastructures for the mobility of people and/or goods caused by activities in urban area.

Transportation problems in Indonesia, in Jakarta in particular, are very complex. It is unfortunate since transportation is one of the foundations of economy. The analysis of the Presidential Working Unit for Supervision and Management of Development (UKP4) shows that the losses caused by traffic jam are amounted to IDR 12.8 trillion per year. These losses were caused among others

by the operative cost of vehicles and stresses felt by the public, having trapped in traffic jam on daily basis. The average speed rate of vehicles in Jakarta is only at 8.3 Km per hour, far below minimum service standard of 20 Km per hour, whereas in Depok, Tangerang, and Bekasi areas, the average speed rate is still at 30.5 Km per hour (www.okezone.com). Meanwhile, DKI Jakarta Transportation Office noted that the cost of losses caused by traffic jam was amounted to IDR 45.2 trillion per year, comprised of fuel cost, vehicles operational cost, time value, economic value and air pollution (Office of Transportation in Numbers, 2011).

Handling transportation problems in Jakarta, traffic jam in particular, the government of DKI Jakarta Province in the era of Governor Sutiyoso leadership had designed a transportation pattern expected to be able to solve transportation problems in Jakarta. This grand design of Jakarta transportation was known as Macro Transportation

The Efforts Of Handling Transportation Problems In Dki Jakarta Through Sustainable Transportation Policy

NIDAAN KHAFIANDepartment of Administrative Science, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Indonesia, Depok

[email protected]

Abstract. Transportation problems in Jakarta are very complex. There are three common problems occuring, such as uncontroled numbers of private vehicles, poor and unreliable condition of public transportations, and indisciplined behavior of road users. This study discusses the efforts to handle transportation problems in Jakarta using the concept of sustainable transportation. Using qualitative research method, the results of the study showed that there are some efforts that had to been done in short-term, medium -term and long-term in accordance with the concept of sustainable transportation. In short-term, the efforts are the implementation of direct services and the organizing of public transport. In medium-term, the efforts are the construction of the MRT and LRT, and also the arrangement of pedestrian lanes. Meanwhile, in long term, the government must integrate the spatial policies with transport policy and establish special authority on Jabodetabek transportation. The results also suggest that there are urgencies to have a shift in the paradigm and mindset of both central and local governments, from transportation policies that favor for private vehicles into policies that favor for public transport, as well as the courage and commitment of the provincial government of DKI Jakarta to implement the efforts gradually and sustainably.

Keywords: jakarta, sustainable transportation, transportation policy

Abstrak. Permasalahan transportasi di Jakarta sangatlah kompleks dimana terdapat tiga permasalahan umum yang terjadi yakni jumlah kendaraan pribadi yang tidak terkendali, angkutan umum yang masih buruk dan tidak dapat diandalkan, serta perilaku dari para pengguna jalan yang tidak disiplin. Penelitian ini membahas mengenai upaya untuk mengatasi permasalahan transportasi di Jakarta dengan menggunakan konsep transportasi berkelanjutan. Dengan menggunakan metode penelitian kualitatif, hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa diperlukan adanya upaya jangka pendek, jangka menengah dan jangka panjang yang sesuai dengan konsep transportasi berkelanjutan. Upaya jangka pendek dilakukan melalui pelaksanaan direct services dan penataan angkutan umum, upaya jangka menengah dilakukan misalnya dengan pembangunan MRT dan LRT dan penataan jalur pejalan kaki, serta jangka panjang melalui integrasi kebijakan tata ruang dengan kebijakan transportasi dan pembentukan otoritas khusus transportasi Jabodetabek. Hasil penelitian juga menyarankan bahwa dibutuhkan adanya perubahan paradigma dan pola pikir dari pemerintah, baik pusat dan daerah, dari kebijakan transportasi yang berpihak kepada kendaraan pribadi menjadi kebijakan yang berpihak kepada transportasi publik dan keberanian serta komitmen dari pemerintah provinsi DKI Jakarta untuk dapat melaksanakan upaya-upaya tersebut secara bertahap dan berkelanjutan.

Kata kunci: jakarta, kebijakan transportasi, transportasi berkelanjutan

KHAFIAN, THE EFFORTS OF HANDLING TRANSPORTATION PROBLEMSBisnis & Birokrasi, Jurnal Ilmu Administrasi dan OrganisasiInternational Journal of Administrative Science & Organization, September 2013 Volume 20, Number 3180 181

consumption of non-renewable resources to the sustainable yield level, reuses and recycles its components, and minimizes the use of land and the production of noise.”

In sustainable transportation concept, there are three indicators: economic, social, and environmental indicators. From economic aspect, transportation system must support economy vitality while building the infrastructures for the attitude of social ability and willingness to pay. Social aspect is related to adjusting social needs with the efforts of making transportation easier to access, safe, and comfortable; while environmental aspect required a suitable solution that strengthens the development of natural environment, and empowers natural environment policy, reduces emission, and uses minimimum material resources.

One important thing in sustainable transportation is the need of integrating policies from some areas, in particular transportation, spatial plan, and environment policies, as mentioned by European Conference of Ministers of Transport in Geerlings and Stead (2003) as follows: “[s]ustainability requires that policy-making for urban travel be viewed in holistic sense; that planning for transport, land-use, and the environment no longer be undertaken in isolation one from the other … without adequate policy coordination, the effectiveness of the whole package of measures and their objectives is compromised.”

Thus, in the sustainable transportation concept, it is expected that there are integration and harmonization, not only between transportation modes, but also between economic, social, and environmental needs through better accessibility and quality, implementation of multimode transportation, and interconnectivity between existing transportation patterns. Moreover, it will take an integration of policies between transportation, land use and environment policies in order to build a lively city.

RESEARCH METHODS

The research approach employed in this study is qualitative approach. By employing this approach, the researcher endeavored to analyze the object of this study in intensive, thorough, detailed, and comprehensive manner, thus not limited by measuring instrument. Moreover, qualitative method is employed so that researcher acquired a thorough understanding and highly probable gained new and important information that could not be gathered by using quantitative approach. Meanwhile, the data collecting technique employed is literary study, field observation, and in-depth interviews. The data analysis is conducted through qualitative data analysis. By conducting qualitative analysis, this study can be more focus on showing the meaning, giving description, and placing data in each context.

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

Transportation system problems in Jakarta are indeed very dynamic. Changes in existing transportation system actually contribute to the complexity of transportation problems in Jakarta. The main problem is traffic jam.

The rate of traffic jam in Jakarta is increasing over times. The lanes that a decade ago was jam-free nowadays are packed with traffic jam. These intertwined transportation problems were caused by many factors, such as uncontrolled number and usage of private vehicles, poor and unreliable public transportation modes, and indisciplined behavior of road users.

The uncontrollable number and usage of private vehicles had begun in the 1970s, particularly during the beginning of increasing economic rate in Indonesia. Moreover, credit application of motor vehicles became easier with lower down payment and interest which contributed to the increasing rate of vehicles sold in Jakarta and its surroundings. The data from the Directorate of Traffic (Ditlantas) of Polda Metro Jaya showed that the number of cars sold in Jakarta has increased 11% compared to previous year. In the 1st quarter of 2011 alone, the cars sold in Jakarta were amounted to 225,739 units, while in 2012 the sales in the 1st quarter has amounted to 249,589 units (www.merdeka.com). That many people relied more on private vehicles for their transportation were due to the view that private vehicles, motorcycle in particular, are more comfortable and economical compared to the uncomfortable public transportation. A motorcycle can save up to 37.76% per month compared to pulic transportation.

The policies to control private vehicles number, such as the confinement of vehicle purchasing, cannot be applied at all in Indonesia. This policy seems hard to be implemented since it relates to many concerned parties, such as automotive industry actors, government, and the public itself. The policy of controlling private vehicles will harm automotive industries which will lose their market share in Indonesia by the stipulation of such policy. The government themselves, local government in particular, will face a decrease in tax revenue, particularly from motor vehicle tax. Meanwhile, from public view, this policy can be regarded as a restraint in individual right to own goods.

The authority to stipulate a policy limiting motor vehicle ownership up to now lies in the hand of central government. Unfortunately, to this day, the central government does not take a firm stance on this matter, such as by regulating higher down payment for motorcycle purchasing. Local government itself, Jakarta Province government in this case, has no authority to stipulate this policy. The only thing that can be done is stipulating progressive tax for motor vehicles which imposes higher taxes for second and more vehicle ownerships. Therefore, in terms of private vehicle, the only way to control it is by confining its usage, not its ownership.

Many people prefer taking private vehicle since public transportations at present are still in very poor condition. Buses, mini buses, tricycle and other modes of public transportation in Jakarta are quantitatively and qualitatively unreliable. In quantity, public transportations in Jakarta at the moment are only amounted to 2% of all vehicles in Jakarta, while in quality both from comfort, safety, and punctuality aspects, the public transportations in Jakarta are known for their unreliability.

Pattern of DKI Jakarta (PTM) which was then stipulated in the Governor Decree Number 103 Year 2007. This decree stipulates some programs to handle transportation problems in Jakarta, traffic jam in particular. Some of these programs are Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), later known as Busway, Light Rapid Transit (LRT), Mass Rapid Transit (MRT), and other transportation policies.

However, during the implementation of these policies, there were still some problems occurred. In fact, there were problems in the implementation of PTM policy itself. Perceiving at the large number of transportation problems in Jakarta at present, it seems that the transportation system in Jakarta has not accomplished a sustainable transportation system yet. Sustainable transportation basically accentuates the importance of accessibility for transportation users, synchronization of transportation modes, synchronization of policies, on spatial plan, transportation and environment in particular, and primarily creating a transportation system which is environmental-friendly and reduces the effect of greenhouse gases emission.

Therefore, it would take a reassessment of the macro transportation pattern policy implemented since 2007 to accomplish sustainable transportation in Jakarta. This is urgent in order to improve the macro transportation pattern policy so as to create sustainable transportation policy in Jakarta. This study will discuss the complexity of transportation problems and Macro Transportation Pattern policy in DKI Jakarta and the efforts that can be taken to handle transportation problems by employing sustainable transportation policy in Jakarta.

Edwards III and Sharkansky (1978) defined state policy as what was stated and done or not done by the government. This state policy is the targets or objectives of government programs. While public policy is defined by James Anderson (2000) as “a relative stable, purposive course of action followed by an actor or set of actors in dealing with a problem or matter of concern”.

In its process, a public policy has some stages to facilitate its study, although there are some differences in the distribution of these stages. Winarno (2002) distributed these stages into: agenda drafting stage, policy formulation stage, policy adoption stage, policy implementation stage, and policy assessing stage. The implementation stage can be regarded as an important stage since a policy will only be a plan stored in the archive if it is not implemented. In essence, policy implementation can be perceived as a process of implementing policy decision. Hill and Hupe (2002) had formulated a more detailed definition of state policy implementation process, namely: “[i]mplementation is the carrying out of a basic policy decision, usually incorporated in a statute but which can also take the form of important executive orders or court decisions. Ideally, that decision identifies the problem(s) to be addressed, stipulates the objective(s) to be pursued, and, in a variety of ways, ‘structures’ the implementation process. The process normally runs through a number of stages beginning with passage of basic statute, followed by the policy outputs (decisions) of the implementing agencies, the compliance of target groups with those decisions, the

actual impacts – both intended and unintended – of those outputs, the perceived impacts of the Office’s decisions, and, finally, important revisions (or attempted revisions) in the basic statute”.

In the implementation process of a policy, the probability of differences emerged between what is expected or planned by the decision maker and what is actually attained (as a result or achievement of the policy implementation) will always be open. Hill and Hupe (2002) stated that the failure in implementation process is also known as implementation failure or implementation deficit, that is: “giving a normative qualification as a result of a comparison between what is observed and what is expected, where the latter is defined in terms of the values either of the observer or of one or more of the actors involved in the process.”

It is in this stage that a policy evaluation process, defined by Fischer as “the activity of applied social science typically referred to as policy analysis or policy science” (Hill and Hupe, 2002), is required. Therefore, the policy process itself is not free from policy analysis. Quade (1982) mentioned that policy analysis is a fact emerged since the existing policy formulation is unsatisfactory. Policy analysis is also needed to prevent a policy from becoming a failed policy (policy failure) and to overcome the failure of the policy, it must be learned so as to lead to policy change. Through policy learning, the failed policy is expected to turn into a better policy that can attain its objectives and increase public trust for the government and political institution issuing the policy.

One form of policies is transportation policy that regulates the transportation system to be implemented. Cascetta (2001) defined transportation system as “the combination of elements and their interactions which produce the demand for travel within a given area and the supply of transportation services to satisfy this demand”. Thus, transportation system is a union of some elements interacted with each other to create a need of travel in a certain area and the availability of transportation service to fulfill the need. One important transportation system is public transportation. Gray and Hoel (1992) defined public transportation as “urban public transportation, strictly defined, includes both transit and paratransit categories, since both are available for public use”. Thus, public transportation is all modes of transportation, both in transit and paratransit categories, provided for public need.

The development of urban public transportation at the moment is entering a new era by the emergence of Sustainability Transportation concept. The Centre for Sustainable Transport, at the University of Plymouth in Schiller, et al. (2010) gave definition of sustainable transportation as follows: “[a] sustainable transportation system is one that: allows the basic access needs of individuals and societies to be met safely, and in a manner consistent with human and ecosystem health, and with equity within and between generations; is affordable, operates efficiently, offers choice of transport mode, and supports a vibrant economy; limits emissions and waste within the planet’s ability to absorb them, minimizes


arrangement of traffic control area and the obligation to carry at least 3 passengers per one vehicle on specific streets in DKI Jakarta province is a policy limiting private vehicle passengers of minimum 3 persons from 7-9 a.m. and 4.30-7 p.m. However, although this policy has been implemented since 2003 up to now, it still seems unable to overcome traffic jam in those streets. In fact, this policy evokes another problem, namely the development of informal sector of 3 in 1 jockeys. These 3 in 1 jockeys are always present in every 3 in 1 imposed street and their number increased every year. Some of Jakarta citizen even have this 3 in 1 jockey as profession since they find it pay better than being a scavenger or other informal sector jobs.

Other policy in traffic limitation is electronic road price (ERP) which is a congestion charge imposed on private vehicle drivers in specific roads at specific time so that a balance of demand (traffic) and supply (road availability) is expected to be reached. One constraint of the previous ERP is the absence of legal basis for its implementation, and that is why the government of DKI Jakarta endeavors to produce the even-odd policy as intermediate policy, prior to the full implementation of ERP. The even-odd policy is conducted by allowing only vehicle with specific plate number to enter some parts of the city according to the date of the day. To mark vehicles with even or odd plate number, government of DKI Jakarta is preparing special stickers, green for odd numbers and red for even numbers. These stickers will be printed by Perum Peruri so any forgery will result in criminal charges.

The even-odd policy itself offers problems in its immediate implementation, mainly related to the identification and registration of vehicles conducted by the Police Department. Besides the trouble in vehicle identification and registration, this even-odd policy is still surrounded by pros and cons. The pro side sees this policy very vital in limiting private vehicle usage but the contra side sees this policy as ineffective and will only evoke new problems. The reason for this refusal is also based on the implementation of even-odd policy in other countries such as in Philippine. The implementation of even-odd number policy in Philippine was unsuccessful since eventually rich people would buy new cars, so that the growth of private vehicle were still uncontrolled. Besides, there is a fear that this policy will be a new ground for corruption, particularly in vehicle plate number provisioning.

The polemic over the even-odd policy evokes the expectancy of ERP policy implementation in Jakarta, particularly since now the Government Decree on ERP has been signed by the President through the Presidential Decree Number 97 Year 2012 on the Collecting Motor Vehicle Fee as a derivative of Law Number 28 Year 2009 on Regional Taxes and Fees. By this Presidential Decree, the government of DKI Jakarta Province is only required to provide infrastructure requirements for ERP implementation such as manufacturing electronic law enforcement machine, ERP gates and on board unit (OBU) to be implanted in every motorcycle and car that shaped like a small box with a card whose usage is similar to an ATM.

Meanwhile, on parking, the government of DKI Jakarta, at the moment, endeavors to implement the policy of higher off-street parking fare and stricter on-street parking, expecting to make private vehicle owners reluctant to take their private vehicles. This policy is not free from pros and cons. Many Jakarta citizens complain on the raise of off-street parking fare. They found the parking fare too expensive and complained that the raise had never been socialized prior to its implementation. The council members also criticized this policy since the government of DKI Jakarta province was considered of taking one-sided action related to the rate of parking fare. On the other hand, citizens agree to this policy argued that as long as this raise was accompanied by the increase in parking service, there is no objection to the rate of parking fare at the present.

The third strategy in Macro Transportation Pattern is increasing the capacity of road network. At the moment, the total road network in Jakarta is only amounted to 6% of the whole area-size, and to increase the capacity of road network, the Government of Jakarta Province is planning to construct six segments of toll road and two segments of non-toll road. The 6 toll road segments are Kampung Melayu-Kemayoran (9.6 km), Semanan-Sunter through Rawabuaya Duri Pulo (22.8 km), Kampung Melayu-Duripulo through Tomang (11.4 km), Sunter-Pulogebang through Kelapa Gading (10.8 km), Ulujami-Tanah Abang (8.3 km), and Pasar Minggu-Casablanca (9.5 km). However, although the construction plan of these six toll road segments has been inserted into the spatial (RTRW) planning of Jakarta that is stipulated in Regional Decree Number 1 Year 2012, up to now the construction process of these six toll road segments has not been conducted.

One of the factors delaying the construction of these six toll road segments is public refusal. The construction of these six toll road segments is perceived as not the appropriate solution to transportation problems in Jakarta; it is even regarded as only pampering private vehicle users, and unsupportive to the limitation of private vehicle usage policy. On the other hand, the construction of these six toll road segments is perceived as an urgency for Jakarta since the existing road network in Jakarta is insufficient. At the moment, the construction of fly over in Antasari-Blok M route has been completed, but Kampung Melayu-Tanah Abang fly over construction process is stalled. The construction of IDR 2.02 zillion Kampung Melayu-Tanah Abang non-toll fly over project has been stopped because of the shifting in DKI Jakarta ranks leadership. The construction of fly over that ought to be finished at the end of 2012 was stopped after the Government of DKI Jakarta Province requested an audit by BPK and BPKP, prior to re-budgeting in APBD DKI of 2013. Apart from the ambiguous realization of project budget, sudden changes in the design also delayed the road construction.

Of all transportation problems existing, it can be seen that transportation problems in Jakarta are indeed very complex. Complexity of transportation problems in Jakarta becomes harder to overcome since the transportation policy in Jakarta has not been public

The poor condition of public transportation in Jakarta is also related to the conferring of route permit that is still quantity licensing in nature, meaning that the route permit is conferred on the base of the amount of vehicles serving the route, not by the quality of vehicle serving. This quantity licensing paradigm is also the cause of poor public transportation network since public transport operators compete only on crowded routes while ignoring routes with relatively small number of passengers. This will end in the overlapped services for certain routes, while other routes offer no service.

The transportation problems in Jakarta are augmented by indiscipline behavior of road users. Road users, both public transportation and general public drivers, often commit violation of traffic law, resulting in traffic jam. The increasing amount of traffic law violation can be perceived from the results of “Simpatik Jaya 2013” Traffic Operation conducted in 7-26 May 2013 that showed the total number of violations amounted to 54,853 cases, while similar operation in 2012 only amounted to 51,109 cases, or an increase of 3.7% (www.detik.com).

Of all the traffic law violations, motorcycle riders are the highest traffic law offenders. The most often found acts of violation are the taking over of other vehicles from various directions, going against the flow, ignoring traffic lights, and using pedestrian area as driving lane. Besides motorcycle, small public transportations such as minibuses also contribute to traffic disorder. Drivers of these public transportations often have their own way when driving and stopping at leisure at the intersections. Other disturbing behavior of these public transportations is their habit of “ngetem” or waiting for passengers at random places.

To solve these matters, the government of DKI Jakarta has issued Macro Transportation Pattern policy. This policy contains three main strategies, namely public transportation development strategy, traffic limitation strategy, and network capacity-increase strategy. Public transportation development strategy regulates the development of bus rapid transit (BRT) also known as TransJakarta Busway, mass rapid transit (MRT) and light rapid transit (LRT) also known as monorail, waterway, and train. However, in its implementation, this public transportation development strategy has not yet been implemented optimally. In fact, of all 3 transportation modes developed in Jakarta, namely busway, MRT/LRT, and waterway, only busway can be materialized. However, even the implementation of busway encounters problems, in particular related to the lane sterilization and very limited natural gas as busway fuel. These two problems ensue in insufficient service, even more augmented by the yet to be signed minimum service standard that should be the reference for TransJakarta Busway in serving public.

Other problem in the implementation of this strategy is the inability to build MRT and LRT originally designed as superior transportation modes to solve transportation problems in Jakarta. In MRT case, the infrastructure building is still hampered by the debt renegotiation process between the government of DKI Jakarta province and central government. Even after long negotiation

process is over, the constructing of MRT infrastructure still cannot be conducted since there emerged the debate on who should sign the working contract: the central government or MRT party. This is augmented by the resistance of public in Fatmawati and Lebak Bulus areas, refusing the construction of elevated MRT. They fear that the elevated MRT construction will disrupt the property value and beauty of the area and insist on the construction of underground MRT.

In LRT or monorail case, the construction had begun in 2005 but stopped in 2008 due to financial problem. The financial problem befallen this monorail project was dissimilar to financial problem of MRT project. Whereas financial problem in MRT project was due to the long loan-negotiation process between governments, in monorail project the private sector financed the whole construction. The government of DKI Jakarta province only conferred the land-consensus in monorail project while all financing was conducted by private sector, so that in 2008 when private sectors ran out of money the government of DKI Jakarta province was unable to do anything. Today, there are new investors on monorail project. However, the continuity of the project is still constrained by administrative and documentary completeness of evaluation processes.

The waterway as an alternative transportation facility cannot be implemented well either. In 2007, this transportation mode had been operated utilizing Ciliwung river stream in West Flood Canal going through Halimun-Karet route. However, this project only lasted for a while until it was stopped in 2008. The factors for this waterway failure was the unstable water debit of West Flood Canal, too many wastes on the stream disrupting propeller and machines of operating boats, and low position of bridges along the way preventing the boats from passing. These many problems in waterway operation then forced the assessment that waterway is infeasible in rivers and should be transferred to serve coastline routes along Pondok Kelapa-Marunda and Marunda-Muara Angke. However, the waterway route in Ciliwung River is actually still probable for an implementation, provided that the river infrastructures are reconditioned, the stream is normalized, and the wastes are cleared.

The second strategy in Macro Transportation Pattern policy, the confinement of traffic, that includes 3 in 1 policy, electronic road pricing (ERP), and parking, is not safe from problems. The 3 in 1 policy stipulated in the Governor Decree Number 4104 Year 2003 on the

Figure 1. Public transportation waiting for passenger and Motorcycles in Pedestrian Area at Kalibata


considered to protect future transportation policy. The efforts to be done, among others are the integration of transportation policy into spatial plan policy, so that transportation policy can be implemented in accordance to spatial planning, not against each other. Moreover, in the future, there needs to be a special authority for Jabodetabek transportation since transportation problems in Jakarta cannot be detached from the transportation plans in regions surrounding Jakarta. The last is the implementation of Jabodetabek transportation master plan, comprised of two modes, bus and train. This Grand design of transportation can help integrate the interregional transportation policies in Jabodetabek, so that existing transportation policies will be holistic and integrated.

CONCLUSION Transportation problems in Jakarta are indeed very

complex, like intertwined thread that is hard to untie. Transportation problems in Jakarta are the ever increasing and uncontrollable numbers of private vehicles, unreliable public transportation, and indiscipline behavior of road users. The macro transportation pattern policy, expected to overcome transportation problems, has its own problems in its implementation. This complexity is augmented with the non-existence of policy that really supports public transportations and the reluctance and discouragement of DKI Jakarta provincial government to implement PTM.

To overcome these problems, there must be efforts taken to revitalize PTM policy conducted in short term, middle term, and long term, so that PTM policy in the future can be a sustainable transportation policy.

Suggestion offered by this research is that the government of DKI Jakarta province should be able to change the paradigm and mindset underlying the transportation policy, from transportation policy oriented on private vehicle to transportation policy oriented on public transportation. Thus the transportation policy to be given first priority is the transportation policy supporting the improvement of public transportation. The government of DKI Jakarta province is expected to be able to implement efforts in revitalizing macro transportation pattern policies in accordance to the required time span, with the main priority on the implementation of direct services and revitalization of public transportation. There must be an integration between transportation policy and spatial plan policy, particularly in Detailed Spatial Planning (RDTR) which is still in its formulation stage. The support from central government is needed, related to policy and regulation at national level, particularly related

to interregional cooperation and environmental friendly fuel provision. Political support from the Council is also needed particularly related to regulation and budget at regional level required to implement the transportation policy

REFERENCES

Abidin, Said Zainal. 2004. Kebijakan Publik Edisi Revisi. Jakarta: Penerbit Pancur Siwah.

Alwi. 2012. Network Implementation Analysis on Democratic Public Service. Jurnal Ilmu Administrasi dan Organisasi, Bisnis & Birokrasi, Vol. 19, No. 2 (May).

Anderson, James E. 2000. Public Policy Making. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Cascetta, Ennio. 2001. Transportation System Engineering: Theory and Method. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publisher.

Edwards III, George C. dan Ira Sharkansky. 1978. The Policy Predicament. San Fransisco: W.H. Freeman and Company.

Hill, Michael and Peter Hupe. 2002. Implementing Public Policy. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.

Geerlings, Harry and Dominic Stead. The Integration of Land Use Planning, Transport and Environment in European Policy and Research. Transport Policy Journal 10 (2003), pp 187-196

Gray, George E. and Lester A. Hoel (Ed.). 1992. Public Transportation (2nd ed). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Provincial Government of DKI Jakarta. 2011. Buku Dinas Perhubungan Dalam Angka Tahun 2011. Jakarta: Dinas Perhubungan DKI.

Quade, E.S. 1982. Analysis for Public Decission. New York: Elsevier Science Publishing.

Schiller, Preston L., Eric C. Bruun, and Jeffrey R. Kentworthy. 2010. An Introduction to Sustainable Transportation: Policy, Planning, and Implementation. London: Earthscan.

Tamin, Ofyar Z. 2000. Perencanaan dan Pemodelan Transportasi. Bandung: Penerbit ITB.

Winarno, Budi. 2002. Kebijakan Publik: Teori dan Proses. Yogyakarta: Penerbit Media Pressindo.

www.detik.com. 54 Ribu Pelanggaran Lalin Terjaring Selama Operasi Simpatik Jaya. 2013. Senin, 27 Mei 2013 Edition, downloaded on 13 June 2013.

www.merdeka.com. Selama 2012, 13 Juta Kendaraan Sesaki Jakarta. 2013. Monday, 30 April 2012 Edition, downloaded on Monday, 16 June 2013

www.okezone.com. Apa Saja Jurus Atasi Macet Jakarta? 2012. 9 October 2010 Edition, downloaded on Tuesday, 10 April 2012.

transport oriented. Government still sides more on private vehicle in implementing transportation policy than on public transportation, in 1980s and 1990s in particular. This is shown from the unlimited usage of private vehicle in Jakarta. The fuel subsidy and the ease in motor vehicle credit proposal also indicate how existing policy is not sided with public transportation. The government of DKI Jakarta province is also regarded as not having the courage and willingness to implement a pro-public transportation policy, so that PTM policy cannot be implemented well.

Apart from courage and willingness, the overlapping regulations is also an impending factor of transportation policy implementation. Up to now, regulations on transportation are separated by transportation modes, for example Law Number 22 Year 2009 on Road Transportation and Law Number 23 Year 2007 on the Railway. Therefore, up to now on national scale, there is not a single regulation on all modes of land transportation, although integrated regulations are very important, particularly to regulate integrated policy in adjoining areas. For example, transportation in Jabodetabek region should be under one regulation so that transportation problems can be solved wholly.

All transportation problems happened in Jakarta indicates that Macro Transportation Pattern policy as the foundation of transportation policies in Jakarta has not been able to overcome existing transportation problems. Therefore, there is a need for reassessing implemented transportation policy using sustainable transportation policy concept. Sustainable transportation concept basically emphasizes on the integration and harmonization of transportation modes, as well as economic, social, and environmental interests, through better accessibility and quality, implementation of multimode transportation, and interconnectivity of existing transportation pattern. Moreover, this policy also enforces policy integration between transportation, spatial plan, and environment policies for a lively city.

To overcome transportation problems by employing sustainable transportation policy, the government of DKI Jakarta province can conduct efforts in three terms: short terms, middle terms, and long terms. In short terms, government can first implement direct services system in Transjakarta Busway. This system contains three strategies: physical, systemic, and ticketing integrations. Physical integration lets other public transportations use Transjakarta lanes. Systemic integration puts operators of other inner city buses, such as Kopaja, Mayasari Bhakti and Metromini into Transjakarta management system, which is vital so that there is similarity in management to ease the implementation of direct services. Ticketing integration has similar fare between Transjakarta and integrated inner city buses. As of now, the government of DKI Jakarta province has conducted direct services in physical integration by allowing two regular inner city buses operated by Kopaja to enter busway course, namely Kopaja AC P-20 serving Lebak Bulus-Senen route, and Kopaja AC 602 serving Ragunan-Monas route, whose routes are integrated to Transjakarta corridor 6.

Next attempt in revitalizing short-terms transportation

policy is by conducting arrangement and revitalizing of public transportations, particularly to inner city buses in Jakarta. This arrangement of inner city buses is vital to be conducted immediately, related to pull policy in public transportation. Public transportation revitalization by the Communication Office of DKI Jakarta will be conducted in two stages: supplementing investment in renewing inner city buses, conducted by bus operators themselves and donating 1000 buses to inner city bus operators. After direct services and public transportation arrangement, then the next step to do is integrating various public transportation modes serving inner city routes or intercity routes. For example, integration of railways serving regions adjoining Jakarta with busway placed in one integrated environment, and integration between busway and feeders such as microlets that serve the routes not connected to busway.

The fourth attempt is related to the implementation of limiting private vehicle usage system through ERP. ERP with complete legal base is expected to be implemented soon in Jakarta. One thing that needs to be completed in ERP implementation is vehicle identification and registration system. Other short terms effort is the arrangement of on-street and off-street parking as a mean to confine private vehicle and arranging road environment. One arrangement that can be done in parking is by turning on-street parking into parking meter system. By this system, vehicles parking at the side of the road are obliged to fill parking meter according to desired parking time. The last attempt is related to the provision of environment friendly fuel. In this matter, Petroleum Gas is one alternative that should be provided. At the moment, the usage of Petroleum Gas has been conducted on Trans Jakarta but not by other public transportations. However, the provision of Petroleum Gas for public transportations is restrained by limited supply since at the moment Petroleum Gas is more of export commodity due to its higher price. Therefore, the government of DKI Jakarta needs to take special step in providing Petroleum Gas for public transportations. In this matter, there is a need for a negotiation between the government of DKI Jakarta and the Department of Energy and Mineral Resources and Pertamina to increase Petroleum Gas supply in Jakarta more than other regions.

The middle terms revitalization effort can be conducted by starting the construction of MRT/LRT to be used as a superior transportation mode in Jakarta. The road network capacity should also be increased by constructing toll road and non toll fly overs. However, this construction of toll road and non toll fly over is better conducted after the government of DKI Jakarta province improves its public transportations so that people choose public transportations over private vehicle. The last effort in middle terms is by arranging safe and comfortable pedestrian area to facilitate public accessibility, particularly public transportation users, in reaching their destination.

Long term efforts are related more to the policy at higher scope. These long term efforts may not be implemented in only 5 or 10 years, but they are vital to be immediately

Documents

3207-6042-2-PB