Decision Support System Development for

Environmental Disaster Risk Reduction:

Indonesian Experience

Siti Aini Hanum

Environmental Data and Information

Ministry of State for Environment

Indonesia

Outline

� Why DSS for DRR

� MOE Response to Disaster Management

� Decision Support Systems Framework

� Scope of Activities and Locations

� Case 1: Yogyakarta

� Case 2: Pangandaran

� Case 3: Banyumas

� Case 4: Sidoardjo

� Post Disaster Environmental Issues: A Summary

� Recommendations for DRR Collaborative Actions

Why DSS for DRR?

� Dynamic spatial change due to continuous pressure which

will affect Indonesia’s environmental carrying capacity

drastically

� Indonesia is an earth-quake prone area

� Advanced development of ICT could facilitate the data and

information transaction

� Governance issue:

� The rise of civil society roles and participation

� Decentralization

� Limited capacity in Decision Support System development.

Geodynamic and Potential Environmental Impacts

MOE Response to Disaster Management

1. Database Development (1:1.000,1:5.000, 1:25.000)

� Providing high resolution satellite image (Quick Bird, SPOT, Aster))

� Detailed mapping for spatial planning recommendation.

� Environmental quality mapping (water, soil, debris, waste water treatment, land cover and land use change)

2. Damage and Risk Assessment

� Field investigation and mapping affected or contaminated area

� Potential and prediction of impact

� Safe location identification

� Disasters and risk aspects in rehabilitation/reconstruction phase

� Collecting information about earth-quake proof buildings

MOE Response (2)

3. Capacity Building for MOE Regional Offices and Environmental Authorities at Provincial and District Levels

� Environmental quality monitoring and mapping

� Utilization of ICT (GIS, remote sensing, information networks)

4. Post Disaster Intervention

� Post disasters waste management (medical, debris, etc.).

� Revision of spatial planning with disasters and changing environment consideration

� Revitalization of EIA in Aceh specially for rehabilitation and reconstruction projects

� Demo plot for environmental rehabilitation (eco-village, coastal rehabilitation)

Environmental Assessment Methods:

Chronological Development

� Rapid Environmental Assessment (REA) to identify, define and prioritize potential impacts following a disaster and serve as a form of “good practice” for disaster situation.

� Rapid Environmental Assessment and Actions (REA2), further development of REA by embedding the technical guidelines development and technical assistance. REA2 has been implementing in most recent disaster affected areas, such as Yogjakarta and Merapi, West Java Tsunami. Time Frame:1-2 weeks, Target Groups: Bappenas, Bakornas PB, sectoral and donor agencies.

Environmental Assessment Methods:

Chronological Development

� Expert Briefing by inviting experts in the field of Geodesy, Geology, Geodynamics, Building and Materials and Socio-economic to gather comprehensive and objective insights

� Comprehensive Environmental Assessment, further development of REA2 for environmental recovery. Time Frame:1-2 months, Target Groups: Bappenas, BakornasPB, sectoral and provincial and local governments

� Program Intervention for Environmental Recovery in the affected areas.

REA2 Report Output1. INTRODUCTION

2. FINDINGS AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT POST DISASTER V

2.1 General

2.1.1 Casualties and physical destruction

2.1.2 Institutional response

2.2 Inundation mapping

2.2.1 Water marks

2.2.2 Vegetation in Flooded area

2.2.3 Building Structure

2.2.4 Water Marks Delineation Boundary Area

2.3 Post Tsunami Coastal Ecosystem

2.3.1 Ciamis District

2.3.2 Tasikmalaya District

2.3.3 Garut District

2.3.4 Conclusion

2.4 Refugees and Environmental Sanitations

2.5 Environmental Quality Mapping and Waste Management

2.5.1 Water Quality (Wells)

2.5.2 River Quality

2.6 Regional Spatial Planning

2.7 Environmental Institutional Capacity

3. POST DISASTER ISSUE

4. ACTION PLAN AND RECOMMENDATION4.1 Environmental Rehabilitations and Spatial Arrangement Post Disaster

4.2 Follow ups

Annex:1: Team

2: Respondent List

3: Water Quality Data

4: Tide Observation Data

OUTPUT

• State of the

Environment Report (SOE)

• Rapid Environmental Assessment and Action

(REA2)

• Comprehensive

Environmental Assessment (CEA)

• Monitoring and Evaluation

Decision Support Systems (DSS)

INSTITUTIONALISATION

Technical Capacity

Policy Dialogue

NETWORKING

DSS Communities

DATABASE

Spatial

non-spatial

Referral

Metadata

TOOLS

GIS and RS

Statistical Analysis

Modeling

Open based Systems

Decision Support System Framework

POLICY EXERCISE

Model

Case Studies

Scope of Activities and Locations

Disaster Management

� NAD dan Nias (Area 1)

� DI Yogjakarta (Area 2)

� Pangandaran and suuroundings (Area 3 )

Disaster Preparedness

� Banyumas (Area 4)

� Kawasan Merapi (Area 5)

� Sukabumi and SundaStrait(Area 6)

Area1

Area 4

Area 5Area 3

Area 2

• A ‘broad fracture zone’ (BFZ) is identified in Yogyakarta, related to the location of the Opakand Dengken faults and the possibility of earthquakes

• An indication of vulnerability can be obtained by relating the locations of settled and built-up areas and infrastructure to this zone.

• Settlements area above and around BFZ is growing in last 6 years (2000-2006).

• The BFZ has a population density of 600-40,000 people/km2, depending on location.

Case 1: Yogjakarta

Prop. DIY

MAGELANG

KLATEN

BOYOLALI

SUKOHARJO

WONOGIRI

PURWOREJO

KULON PROGO

SLEMAN

BANTUL

GUNUNG KIDUL

KOTAYOGYAKARTA

8°0

0' 8

°00'

7°4

0' 7

°40'

110°00'

110°00'

110°20'

110°20'

110°40'

110°40'110

110

-8

-8

Settlement

Forest

Mixed Plantation

Swamp

Paddy Field

Underbrush

River/Water Body

Opened Land

Dry Field

Water Body

River

Distric Boundary

Road

LEGEND :

LANDCOVER 2000BROAD SCRUPTURE ZONE

DAERAH ISTIMEWA YOGYAKARTA

10 0 10 20

Kilometers

S

N

EW

Source :

1) Topographic Map, 2000, BAKOSURTANAL

2) Danny H. Natawidjaja, 2006, Geoteknologi LIPI

Broad Scrupture Zone

Mainrupture

Faultline Estimate

Jogyakarta Fault

Comprehensive Environmental Assesment

UNEP and MoE Indonesia

2006

Prop. DIY

MAGELANG

KLATEN

BOYOLALI

SUKOHARJO

WONOGIRI

PURWOREJO

KULON PROGO

SLEMAN

BANTUL

GUNUNG KIDUL

KOTAYOGYAKARTA

8°0

0' 8

°00'

7°4

0' 7

°40

'

110°00'

110°00'

110°20'

110°20'

110°40'

110°40'110

110

-8

-8

Settlement

Forest

Mixed Plantation

Swamp

Paddy Field

Underbrush

River/Water Body

Opened Land

Dry Field

Water Body

River

Distric Boundary

Road

LEGEND :

10 0 10 20

Kilometers

S

N

EW

Comprehensive Environmental Assesment

UNEP and MoE Indonesia

2006

Broad Scrupture Zone

Mainrupture

Faultline Estimate

Jogyakarta FaultSource :

1) Topographic Map, 2000, BAKOSURTANAL

2) Danny H. Natawidjaja, 2006, Geoteknologi LIPI

3) ASTER Imagery, November 27, 2006

LANDCOVER 2006BROAD SCRUPTURE ZONE

DAERAH ISTIMEWA YOGYAKARTA

Land Use Change Yogjakarta

Land Cover Change from 2000 to 2006 in Yogyakarta Province

Land cover 2000 extent (ha)

2006 extent (ha)

Area change (ha)

Percent change

Forest 1,318 620 698 down 53%

Mixed plantation 59,789 96,090 36,301 up 61%

Settlement area 54,839 79,327 24,488 up 45%

Swamp 10 1 9 down 93%

Wet rice fields 85,801 91,709 5,908 up 7%

Underbrush/scrub 26,474 9,399 17,075 down 65%

River/water body 3,051 3,051 0 no change

Open land 3,153 3,985 832 up 26%

Dry land cultivation

83,121 33,374 49,747 down 60%

Total 317,556 317,556 0 no change

Evaluation of monitoring results is needed to identify the environmental quality post

disaster and is classified on several criteria:

• Water quality at up-stream area of several rivers along run off lava from Mount

Merapi

• Ambient air quality surrounding mount Merapi

• Environmental quality of rivers which crossed Yogyakarta City

• Environmental quality of Opak fault and surrounding including rivers that meet Kali

Opak at downstream and wells, post earthquake – Opak fault.

• Environmental quality of Dengkeng fault and surrounding including river that meet

Bengawan Solo in Solo at downstream and wells, post earthquake – Dengkeng

fault

• Environmental quality in Gunung Kidul and Kulon Progo post earthquake,

including river and wells

• Environmental quality of textile and tannery industries

• Environmental quality of landfill site including Kali Bedog

Environmental quality monitoring results

Sampling points of River and Sediment Quality near Dengkeng Fault

Sampling Points of Well and Soil Quality along Opak Fault and Surroundings

Some Examples of Sampling Locations of Environmental

Quality Monitoring

Case 2 : Pangandaran

Coastal Vegetations Rice Fields

Coastal Area Rice Fields

Affected Area (Photo July 2006)

Settlement Area Settlement Area

hotel Tourism Coastal Area

Infrastructure Damage (Photo July 2006)

Lokasi Pangandaran

CIMERAK

CIJULANG

PARIGI

SIDANULIH

PANGANDARAN

KALIPUCANGSIKMALAYA

CIAMIS

CILACAP

8°0

0' 8

°00'

7°4

0' 7

°40'

110°00'

110°00'

110°20'

110°20'

110°40'

110°40'110

110

-8

-8

Settlement

Forest

Mixed Plantation

Swamp

Paddy Field

Underbrush

Fish Pond

Opened Land

Dry Field

Water Body

River

Distric Boundary

Road

LEGEND :

Plantation

LANDCOVER 2000CIAMIS DISTRIC & SURROUNDING

WEST JAVA

S

N

EW

6 0 6 12

Kilometers

Source :

1) Topographic Map, 2000, BAKOSURTANAL

2) Danny H. Natawidjaja, 2006, Geoteknologi LIPI

Comprehensive Environmental Assesment

UNEP and MoE Indonesia

2006

Source :

1) Topographic Map, 2000, BAKOSURTANAL

2) Danny H. Natawidjaja, 2006, Geoteknologi LIPI

3) ASTER Imagery, November 27, 2006

Lokasi Pangandaran

CIMERAK

CIJULANG

PARIGI

SIDANULIH

PANGANDARAN

KALIPUCANGSIKMALAYA

CIAMIS

CILACAP

8°0

0' 8

°00'

7°4

0' 7°4

0'

110°00'

110°00'

110°20'

110°20'

110°40'

110°40'110

110

-8

-8

Settlement

Forest

Mixed Plantation

Swamp

Paddy Field

Underbrush

Fish Pond

Opened Land

Dry Field

Water Body

River

Distric Boundary

Road

LEGEND :

Plantation

LANDCOVER 2006CIAMIS DISTRIC & SURROUNDING

WEST JAVA

S

N

EW

6 0 6 12

Kilometers

Comprehensive Environmental Assesment

UNEP and MoE Indonesia

2006

Land Cover Change from 2000 to 2006 in Ciamis District

Land Cover Change from 2000 to 2006 in Ciamis District

Land cover 2000 extent (ha)

2006 extent (ha)

Area change (ha)

Percent change

Forest 1,602 960 642 down 40%

Mixed plantation 7,052 11,384 4,332 up 61%

Settlement area 3,521 3,847 326 up 9%

Plantation 36,425 29,973 6,452 down 18%

Swamp 563 454 109 down 19%

Wet rice fields 11,322 17,016 5,694 up 50%

Underbrush/scrub 7,194 4,849 2,345 down 33%

Embankment 17 64 47 up 277%

River/water body 898 869 29 down 3%

Open land 386 204 182 down 47%

Dry land cultivation

4,080 3,440 640 down 16%

Total 73,060 73,060 0 no change

WATER QUALITY OF WELLS IN Pangandaran

Water quality of rivers in Pangandaran

REHABILITATION ACTIVITIES

Rehabilitated Area (Photo of 21 dan 22 Mei 2007).

Wave breakers in Pangandaran Eastern Coastal

New houses in Pangandaran Coastal

Photo of May 2007).

Hotels and cottages along Pangandaran Coastal after rehabilitations

Fishermans’ activities

Photo of May 2007

Case Study 3: Environmental Sound Technologies

(ESTs) Project

OUTPUTS :

� Database on conditions and trends

(social/economy, biophysical) in Policy

gap analysis and options

� ESTs Demonstration

� Capacity building for related

stakeholders in targeted areas

Partners :

� UNEP IETC-Osaka

� Universitas Jendral Soedirman

(UNSOED)

� SAKANO Laboratory, Tokyo Institute of

Technology

Financial Support :

� UNEP (50.000 USD), MOE (inkind)

Timeframe:

� 2005 - 2007

Case Study 4: Environmental Monitoring Sidoarjo

Mud Flow

• Mud flow volume can not be predict

precisely. In early stage (29 Mei 2006)

is predicted arround 5.000 m3/day.

The trend of mud flows is increased. In

few days it increase to 25.000 m3/day,

and after several moths the rise is

predicted from 50.000 m3/day to 75.000 m3/day.

• Data monitoring from June to December 2006 shows that heavy metal

parameters in the mud which have significant concentration are: Zn,

Cu, Pb, Mn dan Cd. Parameter Hg dan Ag are observed not significant due to limitation of equipment detection.

Mud monitoring for odor and toxicity parameters

Odor parameters

Toxicity parameters

No Location H2S (ppm) NH3 (ppm) Styrene (ppm)

1 0 ,03* 0,025 <0,0002

2 0,036* <0,02 <0,0002

3 0,001 0,058 <0,0002

4 0,008 0,012 <0,0002

5 0,005 0,044 <0,0002

6 0,022 0,007 <0,0002

7 0,005 0,12 <0,0002

8 0,0002 0,02 0,0002

Quality std of Minister Decree no.50,1996 0,02 2 0,1

Source: SoER, 2006

No Location Toluene (mg/M3) Xylena (mg/M3) Phenol (mg/M3)

1 Siring Village 264 <0,001 0,62

2 Jatirejo Village 290 <0,001 3,38

3 Kedungbendo Village 117 <0,001 7,52

4 Renokenongo Village 250 <0,001 2,49

5 Permisan Village 90,3 <0,001 0,81

6 Pamotan Village 586 <0,001 2,59

7 Snubbing 136 <0,001 4,98

8 Detection Limit 0,001 0,001 0,5

Source: SoER, 2006

Siring Village

Jatirejo Village

Kedungbendo Village

Renokenongo Village

Permisan Village

Pamotan Village

Snubbing

Detection Limit

Post Disaster Environmental Issues

� Environmental Information Baseline � Map/satellite images with high resolution (1:5.000)

� Environmental quality (water, soil, air, waste)

� Environmental Impact � Waste management (domestic, debris)

� Environmental rehabilitation and relocation to “safe” area

� Reconstruction Materials� Woods and other materials (reuse?)

� “building code”

� Post Disaster’s Governance [macro vs. micro]� Spatial arrangement (district/city, village)

� Empowering environmental institutions (Regional offices, provinces and district’s Bapedalda)

� Spatial engineered� demo plot “eco-design/development”

Recommendations for Collaborative Actions

• Develop detailed risk and vulnerability maps for hazard-prone areas, using standard methods agreed by all stakeholders and including the systematic acquisition of natural hazard data from multiple sources.

• Review existing laws, recent developments in National Disaster Reduction mechanisms, and encourage the adoption and enhancement of land use plans, building codes, and ordinances to enhance capacity and reduce vulnerability of areas to natural hazards.

• Develop an information system through which Indonesians can learn about natural hazards, including an online portal to resources, websites, and data sharing systems.

• Encourage and enable community-based hazard identification and vulnerability and risk assessment from an all-hazard perspective, and provide support for holistic and ecological approaches to mitigation.

• Support interdisciplinary research and knowledge transfer to document impacts and costs, thus enhancing understanding of disasters and demonstrating benefits that accrue from disaster mitigation.

• Ensure that disaster warning systems activate predefined emergency activities, including such measures as ‘safety shutdown’, ‘evacuation’, ‘stop all jetty operations’, and ‘alert emergency response team’.

• Promote preventive measures, for example in the case of extremely toxic chemicals, by improving storage, relocating storage, using double containment systems, and installing special tsunami impact blocking measures.

• Develop and implement retrofitting, redevelopment, grant, and abatement programs to help strengthen existing structures in hazard prone areas.

• Establish expert committees on disaster risk management system at national, provincial and district levels.

MoE Response in providing Information,

Communication and Technology Infrastructure

Environmental Mobile Information Unit is part of infrastructures system in disaster management for field data acquisitions and provide communication and information network access.

This mobile unit will be used in isolated areas which have no telecommunication network access.