Annex 4: Examples of Good Practices in DRR in Land use Plan
Title of the Good practice/case
Community Based Disaster Management Related to Climate
study
Related Hazard in Semarang and Surrounding Area, Central
Java, Indonesia
Which key area/questions the
Area 5, DRR in Land use Plan
example contributes to
Contribution by
Muh Aris Marfai (Indonesia/Universitas Gadjah Mada)
Annisa Triyanti (Indonesia/Universitas Gadjah Mada)
Abstract
As a coastal area, Semarang is very vulnerable to the
disaster related to climate hazard. In order to reduce the
risk, it is important to use every possible resources either
physical or non physical. Besides building infrastructure and
utilize the ecosystem services as physical measures, it is also
important to involve the community and enhance their
knowledge and awareness as a non-physical measures. The
synergism of both measures will enhance the disaster risk
reduction in Semarang and surrounding area.
Context
Semarang coastal area has a big potential of disaster related
to climate hazards which are included sea level rise, land
subsidence, erosion, and tidal flood. Those bring negative
impact to the physical, social, and economic condition of
inhabitants live near the affected areas. The disaster risk
reduction program which has been established in Semarang
mostly focus on the physical measures. However, it is also
necessary to build and develop the scheme of non-physical
measures by encouraging local people awareness and
actions towards disaster risk reduction.
How the problem was addressed?
- What was done to address the problem?
The central and local government have already
developed several strategies in order to reduce disaster
risk related to climate change in Semarang. The
strategies include: (1) Building dykes and protection
walls, (2) Building polder system and drainage system
(including pumps) (3) Developing ecosystem services
measures such as planting Mangroves to protect the
coastal area, and (4) Community based disaster
management and adaptation strategy by simple
mitigation (Sandbags, lifting houses)
- Who was involved and what role did they play?
The intervention is derived from government in
collaboration with other local and international
institutions, including NGOs and local community
groups
- What were some of the challenges and how were they
overcome?
Damaging infrastructure because of the tidal flood and
inundation, weak coastal protection system and landuse
planning, and social conflict are several challenges
which have to be solved. In addition, the lack of people
awareness to climate disaster in Semarang is also a
serious challenge.
- What are the lessons learnt?
There
is
urgent
need
of
comprehensive
and
well-planned program to protect the area from disaster.
Not only by physical measures but also by encouraging
local people in disaster management planning is needed
to keep the sustainability. In addition, it is important to
empower the local people in order to enhance local
knowledge in terms of community based disaster
management.
- What could have been done differently and why?
Encouraging the contribution of local communities,
either as individual or in a group (community
organization). Several actions have been done due to
prevent the impact of tidal flood, such as by planting
mangroves (which is initiated by local people mangrove
groups in Demak District). The development of program
to enhance local people capacity in the terms of social
and economical aspects.
Results
- What was the result of this approach/intervention?
It has increased local people awareness and action
through community development in order to solve the
issue of disaster in Semarang and its surrounding areas.
- What were the key elements of success?

The role of local leadership to encourage
community
based
disaster
management
program.

The in-line collaboration among stakeholders
and communities.
Measuring success
- Was the success/impact measured?
The ongoing system of development of coastal
protection by and socio-economic program which is
initiated by the local people
- If so, how / if not why not?
However, the programs are still in development phase.
Most of the programs are still focusing on the
establishment, and less on the sustainability aspect of
the program. Many things should be considered and be
evaluated in order to gain a better result, such as
reinforcement of government role and the synergism
with other stakeholders and local community
HFA 1
- Have the result contributed to HFA1 progress in the
country? YES
o
If so, how?
It is a key activity of action 4 core indicator 1 and
2
o
How can similar initiatives be better captured in
DRR/HFA progress review?
It is necessary to combine the physical and non
physical measure in order to reduce the disaster
risk. Encouragement of local people through
awareness and knowledge should be addressed
in the progress review
- Did HFA1 play a role in enabling this initiative? YES
o
If yes, how / If no, what needs to be for HFA2 to
enable such initiatives?
By the establishment of core indicator 2 related
to social development policies. However, it is still
have to be more explored in details
Potential for replication
- Can this initiative be replicated?
YES
- Explain how or why not?
The replication is possible to be applied in several areas
with similar condition (e.g. Jakarta, Surabaya). However
it should be adjusted with the characteristics of each
area and its potentials (geographical, social, economical,
political, etc.)
Contact
Provide contact information of the key person(s) for this
example of practice
Bappeda Kota Semarang (Regional Development Planning
Agency)
Jl. Pemuda No.148
Komplek Balaikota Lantai 7, Semarang, Indonesia
Phone Number : +62 24 3541095
email: bappedasmg@yahoo.com
Marine and Fisheries Agency of Demak District
Jl. Sultan Hadiwijaya, No. 53, Demak, 59515
Phone Number : +62 291 685368