







































 
 

| 43  
 

 
         Geoplanning 

Vol 6, No 1, 2019, 43-54                                                                                                                                                            Journal of Geomatics and Planning 
                                                                                                 E-ISSN: 2355-6544 

http://ejournal.undip.ac.id/index.php/geoplanning 
doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.6.1.43-54 

Mapping the Alternative Locations of Street Vendor 
Stabilization in Surakarta, Indonesia  
 

Rahayu a, c      ,  I. Buchori b      , R. Widjajanti b, R. A. Putri a,c 

a Doctoral Program in Architecture and Urbanism, Universitas Diponegoro, Semarang, Indonesia 
b Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Universitas Diponegoro, Semarang, Indonesia 
c. Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Universitas Sebelas Maret, Surakarta, Indonesia 
 

 
Abstract: The arrangement of street vendors is continuously undertaken by the government 

of Surakarta City for the sake of attaining the city order and public welfare. The inclination of 
Stabilization success level in achieving the goal of street vendor arrangement strategy indicates 
that the location characteristics conforming to the street vendors’ preferences become one of 
the determinations in terms of the arrangement success. This article aims at mapping the 
alternative locations of street vendor Stabilization in Surakarta by applying the spatial analysis 
resting upon Geographic Information System (GIS) by means of two stages. They encompass: 1) 
identifying the conditions of the existing street vendor Stabilization locations, and 2) 
formulating the alternative locations of street vendor Stabilization based on the criteria which 
entail the proximate main activities, the crowds of environment, and the availability of state-
owned land. The result of spatial analysis indicates that there are 19 alternative locations in 
Surakarta which are aligned with the criteria and can be utilized for new street vendor 
Stabilization locations.   

 
Copyright © 2019 GJGP-UNDIP  

This open access article is distributed under a  
Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC-SA) 4.0 International license 

 

How to cite (APA 6th Style): 
Rahayu, M. J., et al. (2019). Mapping the Alternative Locations of Street Vendor Stabilization in Surakarta, Indonesia. Geoplanning: Journal of 

Geomatics and Planning, 6(1), 43-54. doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.6.1.43-54 
 

1. INTRODUCTION 
The growth of street vendors in several cities in the world continuously occurs. As a sub-sector, the 

number of street vendors is the most dominant, and they occupy public spaces in the city without necessity 
to pay rent as the formal-sector traders do (Cross & Karides, 2007). The cheap prices of commodities 
become the main attraction for the customers of street vendors. Street vendors play an Important role 
because they provide appropriate consumption for the poor and having contribution for local economic 
growth especially in developing countries (Bhowmik, 2007). 

The supply and demand concept of street vendors’ activities is one of the factors that support this sub-
sector to flourish in Surakarta as a medium-sized city in Indonesia. Surakarta has not managed to achieve 
zero growth of street vendors although the efforts of arrangement in the form of relocation and 
Stabilization have been carried out for 18 years (Rahayu, et al., 2013). Relocation is an effort of 
arrangement by means of moving street vendors to traditional markets (McGee & Yeung, 1977). The 
relocation as such is also called formalization. Formalization, besides locating street vendors in traditional 
markets, also provides them with trading places in the existing malls or modern markets through a system 
of rental (Sarjono, 2005). Nonetheless, as the case encountered in the USA, when the government 
attempted to encourage street vendors to enter the market areas, with the aim of avoiding their presence 
around the streets and sidewalks, this effort even had an impact on the destruction of their profits (Cross & 

Article Info; 
Received: 7 June 2017 
in revised form: 10 Oct 2018 
Accepted: 30 April 2019 
Available Online: 30 August 2019 
  
Keywords:  
locations, street vendor, 
stabilization 
 
Corresponding Author: 
Murtanti Jani rahayu 
Department of Urban and Regional 
Planning, Universitas Sebelas 
Maret, Surakarta, Indonesia 
Email: mjanirahayu@gmail.com  

OPEN ACCESS 

https://doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.6.1.43-54
mailto:mjanirahayu@gmail.com


Rahayu, et al./ Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning, Vol 6, No 1, 2019, 43-54 
doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.6.1.43-54 

54 | 

Karides, 2007). Likewise in Uganda, street vendors preferred to go back to streets after being arranged to 
trade in markets (Lince, 2011).   

The arrangement in the form of Stabilization locates street vendors in public spaces such as in the parts 
of sidewalks, parks, and fields (Adedeji, et al., 2014; McGee & Yeung, 1977; Rahayu et al., 2013; Rukmana, 
2016). The form of Stabilization is In fact favored by street vendors if compared to that of relocation (Cross 
& Karides, 2007; Lince, 2011; Rahayu, et al., 2016). In Surakarta, the designation of public spaces for street 
vendors is determined by the government (Surakarta Regional Regulation, 2008) Stabilization can make an 
urban area become more organized, not chaotic and beautiful, and street vendors become more 
interesting to be visited (Henderson, 2012; Werdiningtyas, et al., 2012). In addition, Stabilization can make 
street vendors more secured while doing their businesses because they are not worried about being 
evicted at any time (Rahayu, 2016). The placement of street vendors in public spaces indicates that 
Stabilization requires the availability of state-owned land as the public spaces which are prepared to be 
used by street vendors (Blackburn, 2011). Besides, the public space locations given to street vendors should 
not be far from their previous locations before being arranged because those locations are also close to 
where they live (Rahayu, et al., 2018) . This is aligned with the point elucidated by (McGee & Yeung, 1977; 
Werdiningtyas et al., 2012). In principle, although street vendors occupy legal locations, their activities are 
still categorized into informal ones (Kettles, 2007; Puspitasari, 2010; Tualeka, 2013). 

In 2018, Surakarta has had 25 locations of Stabilization (Rahayu et al., 2018). The locations of street 
vendor Stabilization are mostly proximate to productive activities in the crowded areas of the city. This is in 
line with the viewpoint given by several previous researcher (Bromley, 1978; Chandrakirna & Sadoko, 1994; 
De Soto, 1991; Haryanti, 2008; Kadir, 2010; McGee & Yeung, 1977; Rahayu et al., 2016; Sari, 2003; 
Werdiningtyas et al., 2012; Widjajanti, 2009). Besides being in the most profitable areas in the city center, 
while trading, street vendors also choose the places which are easily accessible or those such as roadsides 
(Hanifah & Mussadun, 2014; Novelia & Sardjito, 2015; Werdiningtyas et al., 2012), and those which are 
strategic in terms of being nearby and seen by consumers (Rahayu et al., 2016; Werdiningtyas et al., 2012). 
The criteria of places that are reachable, nearby, and visible conform to most people’s needs, wherein 
street vendors manage to overcome the conditions of society movements that are often in a hurry from 
home to work for the sake of fulfilling their needs or getting tired on their way home as well as getting 
entertainment (Cross & Karides, 2007; Kettles, 2007). For a few shop owners doing businesses around 
street vendors, the presence of street vendors is regarded as providing informal security, reducing the 
number of other shops in the sense of reducing competition, and minimizing common crimes that often 
occur on the streets (Cross & Karides, 2007). The aforementioned criteria become the characteristics of 
street vendors’ locations that must be taken into account when choosing the targeted locations of 
Stabilization. 

The efforts to stabilize street vendors are expected to capably decrease the street vendors’ rejections in 
light of the arrangement that does not conform to their chosen locations (Rahayu et al., 2018). Stabilization 
is also believed to be able to control the increasing number of street vendors. Furthermore, Stabilization is 
capable of reducing litter previously caused by the existence of street vendors before being arranged, and it 
is also able to avoid congestion because the Stabilization executed in public spaces only uses a part of the 
sidewalks so that pedestrians still get their rights pertinent to the sidewalk use (Kettles, 2007). Appertaining 
to coping with waste disposal and fulfilling other basic needs, through Stabilization the government will 
provide basic facilities including rubbish bins, parking area, water, and electricity (Chandrakirna & Sadoko, 
1994; Kettles, 2007; Novelia & Sardjito, 2015; Werdiningtyas et al., 2012).  

The street vendors’ locating characters become the typical of their ways in choosing trading locations 
which can be viewed from the conditions of either location or non-location including the proximity to the 
center of productive activities, crowded locations, the proximity to their houses, the ease of accessibility, 
grouping, security, comfort, the needs of infrastructure such as (clean water, lighting, rubbish bins, and 
parking area), and cleanliness (Bromley, 1978; Chandrakirna & Sadoko, 1994; De Soto, 1991; Haryanti, 
2008; McGee & Yeung, 1977; Novelia & Sardjito, 2015; Rahayu et al., 2016; Sari, 2003; Werdiningtyas et al., 
2012; Widjajanti, 2009). In this study, the effort to map the alternative locations of street vendor 
Stabilization is made by considering the spatial criteria which entail the proximity to main activities / land 
use, the degree of crowds and road activities, and the availability of state-own land as prerequisites for 
Stabilization. 

https://doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.6.1.43-54


Rahayu, et al./ Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning, Vol 6, No 1, 2019, 43-54 
doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.6.1.43-54 

 

| 45 
 

Considering the growth of street vendors in Surakarta that continuously occurs; the condition in which 
not all of the illegal street vendors can be organized; the Stabilization resting upon the street vendor 
preferences; and the need to maintain public order, the authors believe that it is important to map the 
alternative locations for the new street vendor Stabilization in Surakarta based on the potency of 
Stabilization locations which have been well-established. The prior studies addressing this issue are still 
very few. Hence, the results of this study are expected to be a sort of input for Surakarta government, 
especially in directing the selection of street vendors’ Stabilization locations which are in accordance with 
the location characteristics and their activities. Directing the selection of arrangement locations for street 
vendor Stabilization as such has not also been widely carried out in other cities though those cities are very 
friendly to street vendors.  

 

2. DATA AND METHOD 
2.1 Data 

The Government of Surakarta has executed the strategy for handling street vendors by means of 
Stabilization at 25 street vendors’ locations. The aforementioned 25 locations encompass: (1) Pasar 
Notohardjo Shelter, (2) Silir Notoharjo shelter, (3) Galabo Malam shelter, (4) Mojosongo shelter, (5) 
Komplang shelter, (6) Timur PDAM shelter, (7) Kolang Kaling shelter, (8) Sekartaji shelter, (9) Pedaringan 
shelter, (10) Timur Jurug shelter, (11) Galabo Pucang Sawit shelter, (12) Pasar Pucang Sawit shelter, (13)  
Urban Forest shelter, (14) Solo Square shelter, (15) Buah Purwosari shelter, (16) Supomo  shelter, (17) 
Sriwedari shelter, (18) Timur Telkom shelter, (19) Galabo Siang shelter, (20) KS Tubun shelter, (21) Menteri 
Supeno shelter, (22) SD Kristen Manahan shelter, (23 ) Hasanudin shelter, (24) Arcade at Kotta Barat, and 
(25) Wahidin shelter (see figure 1). 

2.2 Method 
This article aims at mapping the alternative locations of street vendor Stabilization in Surakarta which is 

attained through two stages:  

A. Identifying the condition of the existing street vendor Stabilization locations in Surakarta 

The Identification is undertaken at 25 locations of the existing street vendor Stabilization in Surakarta, 
and it is executed by using spatial criteria which entail the proximate main activities, traffic crowds, and the 
availability of the state-owned land (Blackburn, 2011; Ray Bromley, 1991; Chandrakirna & Sadoko, 1994; De 
Soto, 1991; Haryanti, 2008; McGee & Yeung, 1977; Novelia & Sardjito, 2015; Rahayu et al., 2016; Sari, 2003; 
Werdiningtyas et al., 2012; Widjajanti, 2009). Thus, what is meant by the characteristics of street vendor 
locations in the present study is the potency of street vendor arrangement locations resting upon the 
above criteria. 

The conformity between the location characteristics of street vendor Stabilization and the street 
vendors’ needs in carrying out their trading activities has an impact on the success of the street vendor 
arrangement in the form of Stabilization in Surakarta, where in it is indicated by their consistency in 
continuously trading at the Stabilization locations (Rahayu et al., 2016). This point leads the Stabilization 
areas to be harmonious and livelier so that street vendors’ incomes after Stabilization increase (Rahayu et 
al., 2016). Therefore, the location characteristics of the existing street vendor Stabilization are used to 
identify the alternative potential locations for further Stabilization as a way to provide the government with 
a solution with respect to the arrangement of locations for street vendors who have not yet been 
stabilized. 

 

B. Identifying the alternative locations for street vendor Stabilization 
The alternative locations for street vendor Stabilization are formulated based on the potency of the 

existing Stabilization locations encompassing the proximate main activities, the traffic crowds, road 
activities, and the availability of the state-owned land. The technique of analysis which is applied refers to 
the superimpose analysis of GIS-based maps for each criterion. Those criteria are assumed to have been 
aligned with the needs of the locations that accommodate the street vendors’ trading activities. Thus, the 
replica of success can be realized. 

 
 

https://doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.6.1.43-54


Rahayu, et al./ Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning, Vol 6, No 1, 2019, 43-54 
doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.6.1.43-54 

54 | 

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 

The results and discussion are split into two parts, namely the location conditions of the existing street 
vendor Stabilization in Surakarta, and the alternative potential locations for street vendor Stabilization. 

3.1 The Location Conditions of the Existing Street Vendor Stabilization in Surakarta 
The strategy of street vendor arrangement by means of Stabilization has a higher success rate compared 

to relocation (Rahayu et al., 2016). This is because Stabilization establishes trade facilities and locating 
street vendors at their previous locations or at the places close to their previous ones. Stabilization 
minimizes the changes of street vendors’ locating characteristics so that they do not need to adapt while 
doing their trading activities at the post-arrangement locations. With similar characteristics to the prior 
locations but with better conditions, the increase in street vendors’ welfare as the goal of arrangement can 
more easily be attained (Rahayu et al., 2016).  

According to (Rahayu et al., 2016), the street vendors’ locating characteristics have a large influence on 
the success of the street vendor arrangement strategy applied in Surakarta. It is indicated by the harmony 
established in the Stabilization areas, some street vendors that do not move to other places while carrying 
out trading activities, and most of the street vendors’ incomes that increase. Therefore, identifying the 
potency / conditions of street vendor Stabilization locations are essential to be done. Furthermore, seeking 
new locations resting upon the identified potency of locations can give the bases for mapping the 
alternative Stabilization locations especially for the street vendors who have not yet been arranged. The 
following map displays the distribution of street vendor Stabilization locations in Surakarta shown in Figure 
1. 

Figure 1. The Map of the Distribution of Street Vendor Stabilization Locations in Surakarta (Source: 
Observation Results, 2017) 

 
Anchored in the results of identifying the characteristics of the existing street vendor Stabilization 

locations in Surakarta, it is known that the Stabilization locations tend to approach consumers with settled 
services. The approach to consumers is done by taking the locations which are proximate to the main 
productive activities such as trade and services, settlements, offices, education, and recreation. This is 
aligned with the opinion conveyed by (R Bromley, 1978; Chandrakirna & Sadoko, 1994; De Soto, 1991; 
Haryanti, 2008; Kadir, 2010; Sari, 2003; Werdiningtyas et al., 2012; Widjajanti, 2009, 2016), whereby the 
main characteristics of street vendors’ locations are close to the main productive activities in the crowded 
areas of the city center. The areas having productive activities will offer the presence of respective 
customers to street vendors, so they do not have to worry about the market segment of their commodities. 

https://doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.6.1.43-54


Rahayu, et al./ Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning, Vol 6, No 1, 2019, 43-54 
doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.6.1.43-54 

 

| 47 
 

Besides being located in the most profitable areas in the city center, while trading, street vendors will 
choose the places that are easily accessible or near the roads (Hanifah & Mussadun, 2014; Novelia & 
Sardjito, 2015; Werdiningtyas et al., 2012), so that their positions are strategic, or in other words, they are 
nearby and seen by the consumers (Werdiningtyas et al., 2012). The criteria that extend to being easily 
accessible, nearby, and visible conform to the people’s needs in that street vendors are able to cope with 
the conditions of people who are often in a hurry from home to work, to get entertainment, or to fulfill 
their needs (Cross & Karides, 2007; Kettles, 2007). Therefore, the strategic locations are those near the 
roads/sidewalks/pedestrian paths on the collector and local road corridors with the traffic conditions that 
are commonly crowded to very crowded. Thus, crowded areas also become tha potential locations of the 
existing street vendor Stabilization in Surakarta. Grounded in the 25 Stabilization locations, the 
characteristics of the Stabilization locations on the state-owned land can be shown as follows. 

• The locations that are proximate to trading activities and are on local roads with crowded up to very 
crowded traffic conditions can be seen at the locations of Galabo Malam shelter, Galabo Siang shelter 
and Timur Telkom shelter. The locations that are proximate to trading activities and are on the collector 
roads with crowded up to very crowded traffic conditions are those of Komplang shelter, Galabo Pucang 
Sawit shelter, Pasar Pucang Sawit shelter, arcade of Kotta Barat, and Wahidin shelter. The Locations that 
are close to trading activities and are on neighborhood roads with quite crowded to crowded traffic 
conditions are those Pasar Notoharjo shelter, Silir Notoharjo shelter, Solo Square shelter, Sekartaji 
shelter, Buah Purwosari shelter, and Pedaringan shelter. 

• The location that is proximate to residential activities and is on the collector road with a very crowded 
traffic condition is that of Mojosongo shelter. The locations that are close to residential activities and 
are on neighborhood roads with quite crowded up to crowded traffic conditions are those of Timur 
PDAM shelter, Kolang Kaling shelter, Urban Forest shelter, and SD Kristen Manahan. The locations that 
are proximate to residential activities and are on local roads with quite crowded up to crowded traffic 
conditions are those of Supomo and Hasanudin Stabilization.   

• The location which is proximate to recreational activities and is on the neighborhood road is KS Tubun 
shelter. The locations which are close to recreational activities and are on local roads are those of 
Menteri Supeno shelter and Timur Jurug shelter. The location that is close to recreational activities and 
is on the collector road with crowded traffic condition is Sriwedari shelter. 

 
3.2  Alternative Locations for Street Vendor Stabilization in Surakarta 

The placement of street vendors in the locations chosen by the Government in an effort to execute the 
strategy of Stabilization arrangement has to adjust to the environment and the characteristics (Dimas & 
others, 2008; McGee & Yeung, 1977). The conformity between the Stabilization locations and the street 
vendors’ locating characters has a major influence on the success of Stabilization arrangement which has 
been carried out in Surakarta. It is manifested by the Stabilization areas which seem to have been 
harmonious, some of the street vendors who consistently stay in their Stabilization areas, and the incomes 
of some street vendors that increase (Rahayu et al., 2016). Hence, the results of spatial identification as 
regards the location characteristics of the existing street vendor Stabilization become the staple criteria for 
mapping the alternative Stabilization locations which are potential in Surakarta. This mapping can be 
utilized as a strategy of arranging street vendors who have not been managed. The aforementioned criteria 
entail the availability of the state-own land, the proximity to main activities, and crowds as well as road 
activities. 
3.2.1. The proximity to productive main activities  

The proximity to productive main activities is really important for the presence of street vendors as to 
provide the supporting activities in an area. The presence of street vendors is capable of strengthening the 
function of a public space (Shirvani, 1985). The aforementioned productive main activities are the 
commercial ones such as trade, offices, and recreation (Widjajanti, 2009). Other activities encompass 
settlements, education, sports and culture-related activities. The locations which are close to the main 
activities become the most interesting locations for street vendors, and this also refers to their preferences 
in selecting locations considering that productive activities encourage high movements (M. Rahayu, Putri, & 
Andini, 2015). Thus, it is it suitable for street vendors in that in selling their commodities they directly face 
the potential consumers who are passing (McGee & Yeung, 1977; Widjajanti, 2012).  

https://doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.6.1.43-54


Rahayu, et al./ Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning, Vol 6, No 1, 2019, 43-54 
doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.6.1.43-54 

54 | 

The Locations encouraging vast social movements as such are expected to be able to attract consumers 
to come around because their locations are proximate. The people’s arrival to the Stabilization locations 
will indirectly be able to attract them to become the street vendors’ consumers, and the street vendors’ 
incomes can increase. People come to visit the Stabilization locations at some point because they have 
particular interests in those locations, and also because they are near the main activities. However, some 
consumers come to visit the Stabilization locations as the main destination because of particular needs, or 
the presence of street vendors with their attractiveness become the people’s tourism destination 
(Henderson, 2012). For this reason, the criteria with regard to the existence of these main activities are 
important to identify, so the designation of new alternative Stabilization locations results in good market 
potency. The following is a map displaying the distribution of land uses in Surakarta. 

The distribution of land uses in Surakarta manifests the existence of productive activities (see Figure 2). 
The map displayed below depicts the land uses in Laweyan, Serengan and Pasar Kliwon sub-districts, which 
are dominated by settlements with the percentage of 90% and the rest referring to trade and services, 
education, health, open spaces, and offices. In Jebres sub-district, land uses are dominated by settlements 
along with industry, trade and services, education, open spaces, warehousing, and health. In Banjarsari sub-
district, the land uses are dominated by settlements, trade and services, open spaces, offices, and 
education. The dominance of successive land uses in Surakarta extends to settlements, trade and services, 
education, health, offices, and open or recreational spaces. 

 

 
Figure 2. The Map of Land Uses in Surakarta (Source: Development Planning Agency at Sub-National Level 

and observation, 2017) 

3.2.2. The crowded traffic conditions and road activities  

Street vendors trade their commodities by making use of the opportunities around them. For this 
reason, street vendors do their businesses close to the road and the crowded environment with activities, 
so street vendors have opportunities to get consumers (Chandrakirna & Sadoko, 1994; De Soto, 1991; 
McGee & Yeung, 1977; Novelia & Sardjito, 2015; Rahayu et al., 2016; Widjajanti, 2009). The Crowded 
arrangement locations are usually near the roads with heavy traffic but with medium speeds. 

The kinds of arterial and primary collector roads have a high speed of traffic so that the possibilities of 
the traffic users to stop incline to be small. The kinds of secondary collector, local, and neighborhood roads 
have a medium and low speed, so people’s possibilities to stop at the street vendor Stabilization locations 
are greater (Rahayu et al., 2018). The more consumers come, the greater their commodities are sold. Thus, 
their opportunities to earn increasing incomes are also greater. Resting upon this highlight, the potential 
locations for street vendor Stabilization are those close to the high level of crowds and those having a 
medium traffic speed, such as the locations near the secondary collector, local, or neighborhood roads. 

https://doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.6.1.43-54


Rahayu, et al./ Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning, Vol 6, No 1, 2019, 43-54 
doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.6.1.43-54 

 

| 49 
 

Anchored in the map of crowds and road activities, it can be viewed that the highest level of crowds is 
found in Banjarsari, Jebres, and Laweyan sub-districts, and followed by Pasar Kliwon and Serengan sub-
districts (see Figure 3). Specifially, among them entail Tentara pelajar street, Letjen Suprapto street, Ki 
Mangun Sarkoro street, Sumpah Pemuda street, Kapten Mulyadi street, Brigjen Sudiarto street, 
Ronggowarsito street, Dr. Soepomo street, Adi Sucipto street, MT Haryono street, Dr. Setiabudi street, 
Colonel Sugiyono street, Kapten Piere Tendean street, Ir. Juanda street, Brigjen Katamso street, Major 
Ahmadi street, Tangkuban Perahu street, Letjen Sutoyo street, Adi Sucipto street, Sri Rejeki Dalam 7 street, 
Dr. Moewardi street, Kebangkitan Nasional street, Bhayangkara street, Honggowongso street. The more 
crowded the conditions of environment and traffic, the greater the consumers’ possibilities to come 
around. 

 

 
Figure 3. The Map of the crowded level of traffic in Surakarta (Source: Development Planning Agency at 

Sub-National Level and observation, 2017) 

3.2.3. The availability of the land for public facilities or state-owned land 

The street vendors’ role that can strengthen the function of public spaces (Shirvani, 1985) also make 
their position stronger to obtain their rights in the public spaces. In addition, the nature of public spaces is 
open and can be shared for a variety of activities (Carr & Lynch, 1981). This condition is supported by the 
street vendor arrangement in public spaces in the form of Stabilization (McGee & Yeung, 1977), Hence, the 
presence of public spaces owned by the government becomes a key requirement for this (Blackburn, 2011; 
De Soto, 1991). 

The distribution of land-owned government in Surakarta becomes one of the criteria for identifying the 
alternative to new Stabilization locations (see Figure 4). Usually, in these locations, there have already been 
the street vendors who trade their commodities without regulation. The existence of the public facility 
owned by the government / state-owned land is mostly found in Banjarsari and Laweyan sub-districts and 
followed by Jebres, Serengan, and Pasar Kliwon sub-districts. The following is the distribution of state-
owned land as a public facility spread throughout the city of Surakarta. 

 

https://doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.6.1.43-54


Rahayu, et al./ Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning, Vol 6, No 1, 2019, 43-54 
doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.6.1.43-54 

54 | 

 

Figure 4. The map of the existence of state-owned land as a public facility (Source: Development Planning 
Agency at Sub-National Level and observation, 2017) 

Resting on the result of superimposing the maps of 3 criteria for street vendor Stabilization throughout 
the areas of Surakarta, it is found 19 alternative locations which are potential to be used as street vendor 
Stabilization (see Figure 5). The first essential criterion for enabling the strategy of Stabilization 
arrangement to be carried out is the availability of government or state-owned land, so that an additional 
effort to do land acquisition is not necessary. The formulated alternative locations for Stabilization are 
those near the roads or on the sidewalks (which are permitted) and the park which is as a public facility. 
This point conveys the essence that the locations must be state-owned land. This is in line with the opinion 
given by (Blackburn, 2011) stating that the placement of street vendors in public spaces (Adedeji et al., 
2014; McGee & Yeung, 1977; Rahayu et al., 2013; Rukmana, 2016) indicates that Stabilization demands the 
availability of state-owned land the subsidy in the form of public spaces that will be used by street vendors. 
The availability of land becomes important to avoid conflict and chaos as well as becomes subsidized spaces 
from the government to street vendors. 

The alternative of potential locations also meets the criterion for being proximate to the main activities 
that have already existed such as offices, education, and trade. This point conforms to the opinion stated 
by (Rachbini & Hamid, 1994) in that anytime a new building is established; it is always followed by the 
emergence of street vendors, so that it does not change the basic characteristic of street vendors pertinent 
to the activities becoming the attracting factors. Street vendors seek strategic places that have high 
population densities at the crossing points of public spaces, or the places adjacent to the economic 
activities which have already existed (McGee & Yeung, 1977). The same perspective is conveyed by 
(Haryanti, 2008) who elucidates that there are a number of factors that influence the locations of street 
vendors' trading activities. They consist of the crowds of locations which mean to be proximate to 
consumers, and the high possibility of consumers in shopping. With being adjacent to productive activities 
or using locations having high possibilities of consumers, street vendors can get the benefit from the 
products supporting activities and consumers who need them (Widjajanti, 2016). 

The criterion of location that is on the corridor of collector, local, or neighborhood roads that have a 
medium speed of transportation along with heavy traffic also becomes an important criterion. The spread 
of street vendor Stabilization locations must be able to capture the consumers whose movements pass 
through the street vendors for instance the movements from home to the destination places (Widjajanti, 
2016). In addition, the fulfillment of criterion for the ease of accessibility signified by crowded road 
activities and busy traffic is also important to capture the consumers who make the street vendors' 
locations as their main goal (not just passing through). 

https://doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.6.1.43-54


Rahayu, et al./ Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning, Vol 6, No 1, 2019, 43-54 
doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.6.1.43-54 

 

| 51 
 

Based on the result of superimposing the maps as regards the 3 criteria, 19 alternative/potential 
locations scattered throughout the city of Surakarta are found. The highest number of alternative locations 
is in Laweyan sub-district with the percentage of 37% (7 locations), 32% of the locations (6 locations) are in 
Banjarsari sub-district, 21% of the locations are in Jebres sub-district, and the rest 5% of the locations are 
respectively in Serengan and Kliwon sub-districts. Hence, with the fulfillment of all criteria of street 
vendors’ locating characteristics in the 19 alternative Stabilization locations, it can be said that those 
locations have been able to fulfill the street vendors’ needs to operate their trading activities if discerned 
from the location-related point of view. The fulfillment of street vendors’ needs for the locations is 
expected to enhance the chances of success in respect of the strategy handled through Stabilization, 
whereby street vendors will not move to other locations considered capable of fulfilling their needs. 

 

 
Figure 5. The Distribution Map of Street Vendor Stabilization Alternative Locations based on the result of 

Superimposing the Location Criteria of the existing Street Vendor Stabilization in Surakarta (Source: 
Development Planning Agency at Sub-National Level and observation, 2017) 

 

The nineteen (19) locations were the east of Sala View Hotel (near trading activities on the local road), 
the east of Kasih Ibu Hospital (close to residence and health on the neighborhood road), the north of Tax 
Office (proximate to offices and residential activities on the neighborhood road), the south of Tax Office 
(near offices and residential activities on the neighborhood road), the west of Laweyan Sub-District Office 
(close to office activities on the neighborhood road), the south of Lotte Mart Tipes (near trade and service 
activities on the local road), Yosef High School (near settlement and education activities on the 
neighborhood road), Adi Sucipto Fruit Market (proximate to trade and service activities on the collector 
road), the front of Bonoloyo Public Grave (near residential activities on the arterial road), the east of AUB 
and UTP Mojosongo (close to trade and education activities on the local road), the east of Moewardi 
Hospital (proximate to health activities on the neighborhood road), the west of Junior High School 4 
(adjacent to educational and office activities on the collector road), the front of the Education Office (near 
office activities on the local road), the front of Samsat (near office and residential activities on the collector 
road), the South of Pedaringan Warehouse (near trade and service activities on the local road) , the east of 
State Land Office (close to office and education activities on the neighborhood road), the west and north of 
Senior High School 6 (adjacent to educational and residential activities on the collector and local roads), the 
south of Kartopuran Field (proximate to recreational and settlement activities on the neighborhood road), 
and the front of Surakarta Hospital (close to health and residential activities on the neighborhood road). 

 

https://doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.6.1.43-54


Rahayu, et al./ Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning, Vol 6, No 1, 2019, 43-54 
doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.6.1.43-54 

54 | 

4. CONCLUSION  

The effectiveness of street vendor arrangement is greatly affected by the efficacy of locations to meet 
the street vendors’ basic needs in carrying out their trading activities. The inconformity of arrangement 
location characters will only be a temporary arrangement strategy because street vendors tend to move to 
other locations that possibly meet their needs. Therefore, the street vendor Stabilization strategy inclines 
to have a higher success rate compared to relocation. This is because street vendors do not need to adapt 
to their new location characteristics, so the trading activities will continuously run as they were before, 
along with the added value of the physical arrangement of the areas. 

The obtained alternative locations based on the 3 criteria gained from the characteristics of the existing 
Stabilization locations entail: (1) the proximate main activities such as trade and services, settlements, 
offices, education, and recreation; (2) Traffic conditions and the proximity to roads; and (3) the availability 
of state-owned land. By fulfilling the three location characteristics of street vendor Stabilization, the 19 
alternative Stabilization locations which are mapped can prevent street vendors from space conflicts (the 
spaces refer to the state-owned land), are able to capture consumers around the nearby productive 
activities, have good accessibility to capture the needs of consumers that pass the street vendors or the 
consumers who indeed make the street vendors as their main goal, and enable consumers to have 
alternative choices and to obtain their complementary needs from the provided agglomerations because 
the street vendors’ locations are adjacent to the productive main activities.   

The street vendors’ alternative locations which have been formulated are based on the criteria of the 
existing street vendors’ locations, so that these findings are expected to capably be a sort of input and be 
considered by the government in making decisions for arranging street vendors by means of Stabilization. 
In addition, the criteria utilized in formulating the alternative locations can also be applied as the bases of 
consideration to designate the alternative locations for street vendor relocation because those criteria have 
accommodated the street vendors’ locating characteristics as the subjects of arrangement. 

 

5. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT  

We would like to show our gratitude to the Education Funding Agency (LPDP), Doctoral Program of 
Architecture and Urbanism at Universitas Diponegoro, and Sebelas Maret University for the support in the 
study processes as well as the preparation of this article. We are also immensely grateful to Rr. Ratri 
Werdiningtyas and to all parties for the contributions having been made during the processes of this study. 

 

6. REFERENCES 

Adedeji, J. A., Fadamiro, J. A., & Adeoye, A. O. (2014). Spatial implications of street trading in Osogbo 

traditional city centre, Nigeria. Architecture Research, 4(1A), 34–44. 

Bhowmik, S. K. (2007). Street Vending in Urban India: The Struggle for Recognition. In 2Street 

Entrepreneurs People, Place, and Politics in Local and Global Perspective (pp. 114–129). New York. 

Blackburn, S. (2011). Jakarta: sejarah 400 tahun. Masup Jakarta. 

Bromley, R. (1978). Organisasi, Peraturan dan pengusahaan Sektor Informal Kota PKL di Colombia. 

Pegamon Press. 

Bromley, Ray. (1991). Organisasi, Peraturan, dan Pengusahaan Sektor Informal di Kota: Pedagang Kaki Lima 

di Cali Colombia. Urbanisasi, Pengangguran, Dan Sektor Informal Di Kota. Jakarta: Yayasan Obor 

Indonesia. 

Carr, S., & Lynch, K. (1981). Open Space: Freedom and Control. London: The Smithsonian Institution. 

Chandrakirna, K., & Sadoko, I. (1994). Dinamika Ekonomi Informal di Jakarta. Jakarta: UI-Press. 

Cross, J., & Karides, M. (2007). Capitalism, Modernity, and The “Appropriate” Use of Space. In Street 

Entrepreneurs People, Place, and Politics in Local and Global Perspective (pp. 19–35). New York. 

[Crossref] 

De Soto, H. (1991). Masih Ada Jalan Lain, Alih Bahasa Masri Maris. Yayasan Obor Indonesia. 

Dimas, H., & others. (2008). Street Vendors: urban problem and economic potential. Fakultas Ekonomi 

Universitas Padjajaran. Bandung. 

https://doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.6.1.43-54
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203086742.ch2


Rahayu, et al./ Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning, Vol 6, No 1, 2019, 43-54 
doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.6.1.43-54 

 

| 53 
 

Hanifah, U., & Mussadun. (2014). Penilaian Tingkat Keberhasilan Relokasi PKL di Kawasan Pasar Waru dan 

Simpang Lima. Jurnal Perencanaan Wilayah Dan Kota SAPPK ITB Dan IAP, 25(3), 228–242. [Crossref] 

Haryanti, D. T. (2008). Kajian Pola Pemanfaatan Ruang Terbuka Publik Kawasan Bundaran Simpang Lima 

Semarang. Program Pascasarjana Universitas Diponegoro. 

Henderson, J. C. (2012). Hawker Centers as Tourist Attractions: The Case of Singapore. International Journal 

of Hospitality Management, 849–855. [Crossref] 

Kadir, I. (2010). Studi Karakteristik Penggunaan Ruang Pedagang Kaki Lima (PKL) di Kawasan Eks Pasar 

Lawalata Studi Kasus Jalan Taman Surapati Kota Kendari. Metropilar, 8(1), 108–116. 

Kettles, G. W. (2007). Legal responses to sidewalk vending: The case of Los Angeles, California. Street 

Entrepreneurs: People, Place and Politics in Local and Global Perspective, 58–78. [Crossref] 

Lince, S. (2011). The informal sector in Jinja, Uganda: implications of formalization and regulation. African 

Studies Review, 54(2), 73–93. [Crossref] 

McGee, T. G., & Yeung, Y. (1977). Hawkers in Southeast Asian Cities: Planning for The Bazaar Economy. 

Ottawa: International Development Research Centre. [Crossref] 

Novelia, A. S., & Sardjito, S. (2015). Kriteria Penentuan Lokasi Pedagang Kaki Lima Berdasarkan Preferensi 

Pedagangnya Di Kawasan Perkotaan Sidoarjo. Jurnal Teknik ITS, 4(1), C28--C32. 

Pemerintah Kota Surakarta. (2008). Peraturan Daerah Kota Surakarta Nomor 3 Tahun 2008 tentang 
Pengelolaan Pedagang Kaki Lima. 

Puspitasari, D. E. (2010). Penataan Pedagang Kaki Lima Kuliner untuk Mewujudkan Fungsi Tata Ruang Kota 

di Kota Yogyakarta dan Kabupaten Sleman. Mimbar Hukum-Fakultas Hukum Universitas Gadjah Mada, 

22(3), 588–606. 

Rachbini, D. J., & Hamid, A. (1994). Ekonomi informal perkotaan: gejala involusi gelombang kedua. Pustaka 

LP3ES Indonesia. 

Rahayu, M. J. (2016). Perubahan Kondisi Pkl Setelah Penataan, Stabilisasi, dan Relokasi di Kota Surakarta. 

Rahayu, M. J., Buchori, I., & Widjajanti, R. (2018). Study of locations’characteristics for stabilization of street 

vendors in Surakarta City. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science (p. 106(1)). 

[Crossref] 

Rahayu, M. J., Werdiningtyas, R., & Musyawaroh. (2013). Stabilisasi Sebagai Bentuk Penataan PKL Makanan 

Siap Saji di Kota Surakarta. Jurnal Tata Loka, 15(1), 39–52. [Crossref] 

Rahayu, M. J., Werdiningtyas, R., & Musyawaroh. (2016). Faktor-Faktor yang Mempengaruhi Keberhasilan 

Penataan PKL sebagai Strategi Penataan Ruang Kota Surakarta. Region, 6(3), 109–122. [Crossref] 

Rahayu, M., Putri, R. A., & Andini, I. (2015). Model Lokasi PKL yang Berkelanjutan dalam Mendukung 

Pengentasan Kemiskinan di Kota Surakarta. Surakarta: UNS Surakarta. 

Rukmana, D. (2016). Pedagang Kaki Lima dan Informalitas Perkotaan. 

Sari, A. P. (2003). Studi Aspek yang diprioritaskan pada Faktor Ekonomi, Sosial, dan Fisik dalam Penentuan 

Lokasi Pedagang Kaki Lima di Kota Mataram. Program Pascasarjana Universitas Diponegoro. 

Sarjono, Y. (2005). Pergulatan pedagang kakilima di perkotaan: pendekatan kualitatif. Muhammadiyah 

University Press, Universitas Muhammadiyah Surakarta. 

Shirvani, H. (1985). The Urban Design Process. New York: Van Nostrad Reinhold Company. Inc. 

Tualeka, B. A. (2013). Memahami Kebijakan Pembinaan PKL Surabaya, Kajian Terhadap Perda Kota 

Surabaya No.17 Tahun 2003. DIA Jurnal Administrasi Publik, 11(1), 149–159. 

Werdiningtyas, R., Rahayu, M. J., & Musyawaroh. (2012). Hawkers Behaviour and Characteristic As An 

Important Factor To Empower Local Economy. In 2nd CONVEEESH & 13th SENVAR International 

Conference (pp. 1–9). Yogyakarta: Architecture Department DWCU. 

Widjajanti, R. (2009). Karakteristik Aktivitas Pedagang Kaki Lima Pada Kawasan Komersial Di Pusat Kota 

Studi Kasus: Simpang Lima, Semarang. Teknik, 30(3), 162–170. 

Widjajanti, R. (2012). Karakteristik Aktivitas Pedagang Kaki Lima di Ruang Kota (Studi Kasus: Kawasan 

Pendidikan Tembalang, Kota Semarang). Jurnal Pembangunan Wilayah & Kota, 8(4), 412–424. 

[Crossref] 

https://doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.6.1.43-54
https://doi.org/10.5614/jpwk.2015.25.3.4
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2011.10.002
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203086742.ch4
file:///E:/paper%20AWS/editan%20mamlu/Edited-part%202/Edited-Jurnal%20part%202/.%20https:/doi.org/10.1353/arw.2011.0029
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0021911800142317
https://doi.org/https:/doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/106/1/012063
https://doi.org/10.14710/tataloka.15.1.39-52
https://doi.org/10.20961/region.v7i2.11582
https://doi.org/10.14710/pwk.v8i4.6498


Rahayu, et al./ Geoplanning: Journal of Geomatics and Planning, Vol 6, No 1, 2019, 43-54 
doi: 10.14710/geoplanning.6.1.43-54 

54 | 

Widjajanti, R. (2016). The space utilization by street vendors based on the location characteristics in the 

education area of Tembalang, Semarang. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 227, 186–193. 

[Crossref] 

https://doi.org/10.14710/geoplanning.6.1.43-54
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.06.061

