4.6 Article

Community responses and adaptation strategies toward flood hazard in Jakarta, Indonesia

期刊

NATURAL HAZARDS
卷 75, 期 2, 页码 1127-1144

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11069-014-1365-3

关键词

Adaptation strategies; Community responses; Flood hazards; Jakarta

资金

  1. DP2M International Collaboration Competitive Research Grant for International Publication Hibah Kerjasama Luar Negeri'' Universitas Gadjah Mada [KLN: LPPM-UGM/1579/BID.I/2012]
  2. project Jakarta Climate Adaptation Tools of the Dutch national research program Knowledge for Climate and Delta Alliance [HSINT02a]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Jakarta, as the capital of the Republic of Indonesia, has long been known to be at risk from flood hazard. It is increasingly recognized that community responses and adaptation strategies are essential for planning future mitigation action. In order to investigate the community responses and adaptation strategies employed in Jakarta, in-depth interviews were performed in the flood-prone areas. The results reveal that vulnerability to flooding is increasing, and it is linked to several factors: (1) stakeholders, (2) environment, (3) communities, and (4) infrastructure and its maintenance. Various physical adaptation strategies have been adopted by the local communities, which include raising the housing level, building terraced housing, and building small dikes to prevent water entering the settlements. Several non-physical adaptations were also identified from the fieldwork. These adaptations tend to be conducted through communal work and the reuse of resources and materials left undamaged by flooding. However, uncoordinated responses during flood events produce greater exposure to the hazard, and it can be inferred that community responses remain below the ideal. This study highlights the need for urgent attention to be given to improving the institutional links between stakeholders, especially at the municipal level, which could provide more efficient disaster response.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据