Microsoft Word - 15. Desi Susilowati et al. (APA-N).docx IHiS (Indonesian Historical Studies) 4 (2), 170-185 © 2020 | E-ISSN: 2579-4213 Kampung Improvement Program: Obstacles and Implementation in Semarang, 1978-1988 | 170 Received: June 16, 2020 Revised: December 9, 2020 Accepted: December 9, 2020 Kampung Improvement Program: Obstacles and Implementation in Semarang, 1978-1988 Desi Tri Susilowati*, Yety Rochwulaningsih, Haryono Rinardi Master Program of History, Faculty of Humanities, Universitas Diponegoro, Semarang, Indonesia *Corresponding Author: desi.bpdikjur@gmail.com DOI: https://doi.org/10.14710/ihis.v4i2.8951 Abstract This study analyzes Kampung Improvement Program (KIP) implementation and its impact on social life in Semarang between 1978-1988 periods. The KIP program is considered successful in building and managing slum settlements in Semarang. The success of Semarang in implementing this program makes it as a pilot project for the arrangement of two cities in Southeast Asia, namely Manila and Bangkok in 1987. This study emphasizes the use of government documents and newspapers to analyze KIP implementation progress in Semarang in the period of 1978 and ended at 1988. The program implementation was divided into two major stages, KIP Urban III and KIP Urban V. From KIP program, various physical infrastructure to support basic needs, such as toilets, clean water networks, sanitation, and road paving have been built. In its development, the KIP implementation brings a new face to Semarang towards slum villages, decreases the social pathology of the communities, and develops social groups, such as empowering Integrated Health Service Port (Posyandu) and Family Welfare Program (PKK). KIP Urban III was able to complete the construction of 21 villages, while in KIP Urban V there were 35 villages, bringing the total number of 56 villages developed. Keywords: Kampung Improvement Program (KIP); Urban Problems; Slum; Settlement. Introduction Urbanization and increased number of population occur in several major cities in Indonesia since the beginning of New Order, causing regional governments to be hit by a pile of urban problems. The growth of urban homelessness, unemployment, squatter huts, slums and poor, metropolitan youth gangsters, increasing crime, and crowded public transportation are unavoidable consequences. The government tries to solve these urban problems by implementing a strategy, namely National Urban Policy according to the needs of each city growing rapidly with a focus on the implementation of city building, structuring and development. In terms of area arranging, the government makes arrangements for deemed slum areas by implementing the Kampung Improvement Program (KIP). It is supported by loan funds from the World Bank, the State Budget (APBN), the Provincial State Budget, and the Regional Revenue and Expenditure Budget (APBD) IHiS (Indonesian Historical Studies) 4 (2), 170-185 © 2020 | E-ISSN: 2579-4213 Kampung Improvement Program: Obstacles and Implementation in Semarang, 1978-1988 | 171 in each city/district. KIP I and II were the initial projects held in Jakarta and Surabaya. Entering KIP stage III (1978-1988), Semarang became one of the designated target cities to implement the kampung improvement program (Semarang Regional Development Agencies, 1986, p. 123-127). KIP is then structured in such a way that it is able to achieve its ideal targets, for the sake of improving the quality of life for residents of urban villages and continuing to KIP stage V. The target of KIP implementation are physical and non-physical improvements to urban villages which are categorized as slums, densely populated, and lacking health, cleanliness and habitability requirements. The aspiration to achieve success in building a city into a modern area with complete village facilities, adequate physical infrastructure, as well as for its residents to be more productive is slightly hampered by social obstacles that arise in its implementation (Simone, 2015). However, from the facts, it can be said that the Kampung Improvement Program (KIP) in Semarang which was implemented in 1978-1988 has succeeded in arranging and improving the villages, road access and bridges, so, they are able to demonstrate the uniqueness of Semarang City new face as a modern city, with complete village facilities, adequate physical infrastructure, as well as residents who became more productive. Several important studies relevant to Semarang City improvement policies are written by historians and urban planners, as well as the narratives about KIP in Indonesia. The study from Devas (1981) narrates one of the initial pilot projects of a kampung improvement program in Indonesia located in Jakarta. This program became the forerunner of KIP in various cities in Indonesia afterwards. The villages considered to be slum, poor, unorganized, and far from the standards of cleanliness, health, and habitability are gradually changed. KIP implementation had been considered successful in changing the face of Jakarta’s village. Meanwhile, the Jakarta Government had received praise from the international community for being able to combine physical improvement with changes in the residents’ behaviour who are more concerned with health and environmental hygiene. Another study come from Kusno (2012) which has relevance to the long journey of urban planning policies that can be a lesson learned for urban policy makers. To make a city demonstrate an identity and a happy face for its residents, a city must be built with careful planning and coordination in clear and firm direction. The excellence of Kusno’s study lies in the narrative at the level of detail city planning about municipalities. He is able to pinpoint the mistakes of regional and central leaders who fail to translate the desire of their citizens to build a more humane and liveable city. Political policies of the state and local governments have indeed become an affirmation of easy improvement implementation to coordinate and organize, but the government has abandoned the aspirations of its citizens in implementing improvement. Method The first stage was the collection of sources, consisting of primary sources and secondary sources. To obtain primary sources, the authors searched related sources, those were Suara Merdeka and Wawasan, Prisma, Regional Development Agencies IHiS (Indonesian Historical Studies) 4 (2), 170-185 © 2020 | E-ISSN: 2579-4213 Kampung Improvement Program: Obstacles and Implementation in Semarang, 1978-1988 | 172 Semarang, Central Java Provincial Library and Archives Service, Semarang Central Bureau of Statistics (BPS), and Semarang Public Works Office. The sources obtained from Suara Merdeka and Wawasan Archive Center were contemporary newspapers which report on the dynamics of KIP Semarang implementation, the obstacles and data on the results of program implementation. From the offices of Regional Development Agencies and Semarang Central Bureau of Statistics (BPS), the authors found reports on the results of 1986 city planning and Kampung Improvement Program (KIP) counselling, statistical data for the city of Semarang 1978-1988. In these statistical data, there were various reports relating to the population and area of Semarang in general. In addition to conducting searches to various offices and related agencies, the author also interviewed several informants to looking for the experiences during the implementation in the communities from the start of its implementation in 1978 to 1988 in detail. They were senior journalists for Suara Merdeka newspaper, NGO activists, Neighbourhood (RT) leaders and residents whose villages had received the KIP project. From the results of the interview, the author obtained additional information that was not in the written data. Apart from utilizing primary sources, the author also utilized secondary data obtained from articles, books, and relevant scientific papers. After all the sources had been collected, then criticism was conducted on these sources, both external criticism to obtain authentic sources and internal criticism to obtain credible sources. The third stage in historical research was interpretation. At this stage, accuracy and objective attitude were required, especially in terms of interpretation of historical facts. The last stage was historiography. Historiography was the process of rewriting historical events which was limited by spatial scope, in this case, Semarang City and the temporal scope covered the 1978-1988 period relating to the implementation of the KIP program and its influence on social life in society. The Emerging and Planning of the KIP KIP is raised with the aim of improving the conditions of housing environment, slum and unsanitary, in the city. So, people can live in a healthier and more comfortable housing environment. By implementing this improvement program, it is expected that the conditions of houses and village environment where the community live can change and have better physical environmental infrastructure. The creation of slum environment is inseparable from the problems caused by urbanization, migration, population growth which is increasing from year to year (Purwantiasning, 2011, p.54). Before the implementation of kampung improvement program, Semarang has become a destination for urbanization. It is because Semarang is one of the provincial capitals that offers various dreams to change one's destiny and economic level for better condition. This urbanization has actually created a poverty problem resulted in slum settlements. Those who make a living then lived in villages located near economic centers, ports, and industrial areas. The villages turn into slums, unsanitary, unorganized, and lacking facilities. One example is Bandarharjo located in North Semarang. The port which is a place of economic turnaround has caused people from IHiS (Indonesian Historical Studies) 4 (2), 170-185 © 2020 | E-ISSN: 2579-4213 Kampung Improvement Program: Obstacles and Implementation in Semarang, 1978-1988 | 173 outside Semarang area to come to this place. Empty land is getting narrower and turning into residential houses (Haryono, 2008, p. 64-65). Similar situations can be found in areas located along the railroad tracks such as Bulu Lor, Plombokan, Purwosari, and Dadapsari. The raised beds are then built as shelter, without adequate latrines, and proper sanitation (Kumala and Yusman, 2014, p. 249). Bandarharjo, Bulu Lor, Plombokan, Purwosari, and Dadapsari are only small examples of emergence of slum settlements in Semarang. There are many other places scattered in various parts such as Krobokan, Rejomulyo, Kemijen, Penggaron Kidul, Kaligawe, Jabung, and so on. The existence of slum villages is certainly not a good assessment for the growth of a city (Aminuddin, 2015). KIP then becomes a program that is expected to change the conditions of slum area. There are various methods in its implementation. These include: 1) Purchasing clean water as much as possible and link it to a Water Company distribution network, with hydrants for four hectares of environmental services; 2) Environmental drainage to prevent flooding and secondary drainage that follows the existing road and city drainage patterns; 3) Public toilets with 12 holes for every 3,500 people; 4) Asphalt and concrete roads with a width of 3 meters to 8 meters; 5) A walking area of 1.5 m wide made of concrete with drains, should be provided at the side of the road; 6) Disposal of garbage with a volume of 12 cubic meters, as well as procurement of trucks to transport garbage to landfills (Hamidah, et al., 2016, p. 15). Under the responsibility of Semarang Mayor, KIP is then implemented by Regional Development Agencies with Public Works and Housing as the project implementer. Everything that occurs must be reported by the Central Government and Regional House of Representatives. Then, the Central Government reports its accountability to the World Bank. KIP appeared and started at the end of 1978. By the initial target of 27 villages located in urban areas. The implementation of KIP certainly requires a very long discussion, considering that several villages targeted by KIP are villages with historical values, economic potential, cultural roots, and strong religious elements. The survey was conducted in 1975 in the targeted villages. These were promotion measures and to avoid potential upheavals occurring among citizens (“DPRD Kodya Semarang,” 1978). The Mayor of Semarang then issued Decree Number 190/WK/1978 on the Establishment of Semarang Level II (Municipal) KIP Unit as the legal basis for the implementation of this program. KIP Implementation Dynamics In Semarang Public Works Office (DPU) of Semarang is the spearhead of KIP implementation in Semarang. This occurs because the initial focus of kampung improvement program is to focus on physical improvement. Provision of adequate infrastructure is seen as a basic need of an area. KIP Urban III IHiS (Indonesian Historical Studies) 4 (2), 170-185 © 2020 | E-ISSN: 2579-4213 Kampung Improvement Program: Obstacles and Implementation in Semarang, 1978-1988 | 174 Semarang Government targeted that for five years from 1979 to 1983 the program was going to complete the improvement of 27 villages with a total area of 626.6 hectares and a total population of 207,200. Meanwhile, the average population density in the 27 villages was 331 people per hectare. KIP development was divided into two stages. The first stage was focused evenly over a period of three years from 1979-1981 covering 15 villages, divided into three periods. (1) The years 1979-1980 covered two villages with an area of 65.9 hectares and a population of ± 23,600 inhabitants; (2) 1980- 1981 covered four villages with an area of 98 hectares and a total population of ± 35,800 people; (3) The years 1981-1982 covered nine villages with an area of 154.7 hectares and a population of ± 67,000 people. The second stage was conducted with a period of two years from 1982-1983 as a continuation of the program in the first stage covering 14 villages. (1) 1982-1983 covered nine villages with an area of 156 hectares with a population of ± 51,800 people; (2) 1983-1984 covered five villages with an area of 156 hectares with a population of ± 28,800 people. The improvement of an expansion area on the border of Semarang was a question of several parties. Therefore, the government reiterated its policy, that the priority for KIP implementation was only conducted in villages according to the results of field research that had been outlined by the government and the consultant team. The villages, total 27 villages, were located in the urban area of Semarang, while rural areas in several border areas of Semarang built with a separate program. This was explained by officials of Ministry of Home Affairs, Suwarno during a visit to Semarang City on December 24, 1978. The following was a map of KIP Urban III implementation in Semarang which was targeting densely populated settlements in the lower part of Semarang, as shown in the reconstruction of the KIP map in Figure 1. Figure 1. Reconstruction of KIP URBAN III in Semarang IHiS (Indonesian Historical Studies) 4 (2), 170-185 © 2020 | E-ISSN: 2579-4213 Kampung Improvement Program: Obstacles and Implementation in Semarang, 1978-1988 | 175 Based on the mapping image of KIP Urban III project area, it can be seen that the majority of KIP Urban III implementation in Semarang is still targeting densely populated settlements in the lower Semarang area. The implementation of KIP from the period 1980-1984 covered 21 villages. In 1979-1980 the implementation only covered two villages. The total improved areas were 23 villages. The initial agreement between Regional House of Representatives and Semarang Government was for 27 villages. The number of improved villages in KIP Urban III mostly targeted the Central Semarang area with a total of 12 villages improved, followed by West Semarang with 7 villages, East Semarang with 2 villages, and North Semarang with 1 village. To make the KIP as a successful program, the government held a series of promotion preparations for the implementation of KIP in several villages in Semarang. The last four villages that were in the process of being finalized were Mlatiharjo, Krobokan, Kuningan and Karang Kidul. The districts that were the overall target of KIP Urban III presented in the Table 1. Table 1. Data of Districts affected by KIP Urban III Semarang project Year No Kampung (Village) Sub-Districts 1980-1981 1. Mlatiharjo North Semarang 2. Kuningan West Semarang 3. Karang Kidul East Semarang 4. Krobokan (sebagian) West Semarang 1981-1982 1 Peterongan East Semarang 2 Jagalan Middle Semarang 3 Kentangan Middle Semarang 4 Brumbungan Middle Semarang 5 Gabahan Middle Semarang 6 Pandansari Middle Semarang 7 Karangtengah Middle Semarang 8 Kembangsari Middle Semarang 9 Kembangpaes Middle Semarang 10 Miroto Middle Semarang 11 Sekayu Middle Semarang 12 Kranggan Middle Semarang 1982-1983 1. Krobokan (partially) West Semarang 2. Karangayu West Semarang 1983-1984 1. Banjarsari West Semarang 2. Darat Lasimin West Semarang 3. Tawang Komplek West Semarang Total 21 Source: Regional Development Agencies of Semarang, 1986. IHiS (Indonesian Historical Studies) 4 (2), 170-185 © 2020 | E-ISSN: 2579-4213 Kampung Improvement Program: Obstacles and Implementation in Semarang, 1978-1988 | 176 Some of the ongoing improvement activities were informed in the form of news in newspapers. The following is an example of the arrangement of Krobokan which has undergone significant changes in the KIP arrangement. This can be seen from the results of Suara Merdeka documentation which indictaed the gate entering one of the alleys in Krobokan (as it is presented in Figure 2). Figure 2. One Alley in Post-KIP Krobokan Source: “Hasil perbaikan kampung,” 1980, p. 3. KIP Urban V Semarang Government continued KIP for the period of 1983 to 1987. This proposal was conveyed by the Secretary of Semarang Village Improvement Project Implementation Agency (BAPEM PPK) Ir. A. Wasis. In the plan, Semarang City needed at least fresh funds to continue the project, worth Rp. 5.6 billion, targeting 33 villages with an area of 600 hectares and a population of 296 thousand people. For the criteria of villages that were targeted by KIP in this project, Wasis gave quite strict criteria. These criteria included the age of village which was old and prioritized to have existed before the era of Indonesian independence, there were still problems in the supply of drinking water, environmental cleanliness, toilets, and other requirements according to the needs of a decent life in the village. KIP Urban III succeeded in completing 21 villages, while KIP Urban V succeeded in completing village improvement as many as 35 villages. Village improvements were also adjusted to the Semarang master plan, although it was not comprehensive. There were several components fulfilled by executors in this framework, such as the first, the construction or repair of roads traversed by people had to include completeness, namely channels, culverts, and bridges. Second, construction and repair of roads that were traversed by vehicles and their networks. Third, manufacture and repair sewers. Fourth, installation of drinking water networks and public taps. Fifth, construction of toilets [mandi cuci kakus] and family toilets. IHiS (Indonesian Historical Studies) 4 (2), 170-185 © 2020 | E-ISSN: 2579-4213 Kampung Improvement Program: Obstacles and Implementation in Semarang, 1978-1988 | 177 KIP Urban V project as a continuation of KIP Urban III was conducted in Semarang. The naming that did not follow the numbering order was due to the loan process and funding for this national strategic project that had exceeded the financing limit for KIP Urban IV project. In addition, the village improvements can only be performed again in KIP Urban V because the funds disbursed by the central government for KIP Urban IV were not intended for village improvement, but for infrastructure development related to increasing human resources from a social and economic perspective, such as the construction of schools, flats and small businesses. The villages that were the targets of KIP Urban V presented in Table 2. Table 2. KIP Urban V and Improved Area Year No Kampung (Villages) Improved Areas 1984 1. Banjarsari 8 2. Mlayu Darat (partial) 7 3. Darat Lasimin 13 4. Tawang 7 1985 1. Panggung 26 2. Dadapsari 6 3. Krobokan 23 4. Celengan 5 5. Sukolilo 6 6. Bojong Salaman 21 7. Purwosari 28 8. Mlayu Darat (partial) 7 1986 1. Rejosari (partial) 70 2. Plombokan 12 3. Bulu Lor 58 4. Jomblang 18 1987 1. Rejosari (partial) 40 2. Bulustalan 8 3. Barusari 5 4. Pendrikan Lor 23 5. Cabean 16 6. Demangan 12 7. Lemah Gempal 15 8. Bongsari 25 1988 1. Bangunharjo 8 2. Kauman 7 3. Kartoharjo 13 4. Gandek Puspo 5 5. Karangturi 17 6. Karangtempel 38 7. Sarirejo 22 8. Pederasan 13 9. Kebon Agung 7 10. Taman Harjo 6 11. Kemijen 5 Total 35 Source: Regional Development Agencies of Semarang, 1986. IHiS (Indonesian Historical Studies) 4 (2), 170-185 © 2020 | E-ISSN: 2579-4213 Kampung Improvement Program: Obstacles and Implementation in Semarang, 1978-1988 | 178 The success of this project made Semarang become a pilot project for two cities in Southeast Asia, Manila and Bangkok. Another change in the face of another kampung (villages) at KIP Urban V was seen in Mlatiharjo Village. Settlements facing Kali Banger with conditions prone to flood runoff had received more attention. Residents in this village also had difficulty finding open spaces or fields as places for residents to gather and perform daily activities. Figure 2 and 3 indicated the conditions in Mlatiharjo in 1982. Figure 2. Mlatiharjo Threatened by Floods Source: “Terancam banjir banger,” 1982, p. 2. Figure 3. Gymnastics with Mlatiharjo Residents Source: "Senam bersama", 1983, p. 2. In addition to these activities, Regional Development Agencies of PPK KIP has also conducted the arrangement and dismantling of water channels in several villages around Tawang Station, starting from Bandarharjo, Petek, Purwosari, Sayangan, and Kaliasin. To realize this improvement plan, Semarang Mayor, Imam Soeparto, again IHiS (Indonesian Historical Studies) 4 (2), 170-185 © 2020 | E-ISSN: 2579-4213 Kampung Improvement Program: Obstacles and Implementation in Semarang, 1978-1988 | 179 had to perform calculations with Semarang House of Representatives to increase the amount of improvement loans to the World Bank. In Imam's initial estimation, Semarang had to increase the loan amounting to IDR 447.63 million from the total loan amount for other improvement programs of IDR 9.091 billion. The total amount of this loan has been approved by Semarang Regional Parliament. These additions came after Imam consulted with the PT Trans Asia improvement consultancy team, and through meetings with the Ministry of Finance, DG Cipta Karya, and the World Bank. It is feared that the additional budget became troublesome for the city government, because the loan repayments at maturity in the 1989/1990 period was worrying and exceeding 15 percent of the limit stipulated by the Minister of Home Affairs. However, Imam emphasized that the swelling financing which not be avoided, because it was not only related to KIP financing, but also other improvement projects, such as Mrican Market and Peterongan Market. In general, the Figure 4 is a map of KIP Urban V implementation in Semarang focusing on targeting densely populated settlements in the lower Semarang area. Figure 4. Map Study Reconstruction of KIP URBAN V in Semarang. Seeing the urgency of KIP to become so great, the implementation of KIP project at this stage received tighter supervision from related parties such as Regional Development Agency and Semarang House of Representatives. The possibility of fraud had to be minimized because the amount of funds disbursed for the implementation of KIP was not a small amount and the funding had consequences for returns within a predetermined time. The success of KIP project was claimed by Mayor Imam Soeparto to have changed the face of Semarang by improving 56 slum villages over a period of ten years. IHiS (Indonesian Historical Studies) 4 (2), 170-185 © 2020 | E-ISSN: 2579-4213 Kampung Improvement Program: Obstacles and Implementation in Semarang, 1978-1988 | 180 The mayor's statement was conveyed by Assistant II of Regional Secretary, Ir. Tommy Sasmito Utomo in his written speech at the opening of Urban Integrated Basic Social Service Training (LPSDTP) at Balai Kelurahan Bulu Lor. KIP Urban III succeeded in improving 21 villages, while KIP Urban V succeeded in reorganizing 35 villages, so, total of 56 villages were successfully improved and arranged. As for the continuation of KIP project, to the residents, it will be conducted Tri Bina approach by the Semarang Government. The Tri Bina included environmental improvement, human improvement, and integrated business improvement. Even though in its implementation, the government needed seriousness, because the Mayor of Semarang still felt there was a lack of awareness from residents in post-KIP villages to seriously maintain maternal and child health, family nutrition, clean water and environmental sanitation. Kip Implementation Obstacles Slum villages with high population density are mostly inhabited by people with lower education, poor, and familiar with violence. KIP project in Semarang, which targets villages with such conditions, certainly does not escape obstacles during its implementation. Dissatisfaction with the Distribution of Land and Building Certificates Obstacles over the distribution of land certificates occurred because communication problem between the government and villagers. The residents were aware that the house they live in had the status of being an illegal house, so, when KIP was implemented in their village they felt threatened and afraid to be evicted. The legal force of land and buildings ownership that they did not own, sparked outrage in their minds. Therefore, it happened naturally if citizens were suspicious of the government for the implementation of first phase of KIP III program, as occurred in Bandarharjo, Bugangan and Mlatiharjo. In addition, not less than 1500 residents in 1980 inhabited the areas of Kampung Jagalan and Brumbungan in contact with the Nusaputera School and the Buddhist Foundation (“Warga Jagalan dan Brumbungan,” 1983). Citizens viewed the Semarang Government in this case, as merely simplifying the process of implementing KIP, so, it ran smoothly, but did not care about the fate of other residents who experienced it, and had not received legalization of land ownership. The problem of land ownership disputes in a number of slum villages in Semarang became a fundamental problem in village improvement during the 1980- 1990s. Basically, the community strongly agreed if there was an improvement in the quality of life and a healthier environment. However, it was acknowledged that in practice the government had not actually conducted a comprehensive mapping, so, the issue of land disputes became crucial when the KIP program was implemented. Citizen Protests and Complaints IHiS (Indonesian Historical Studies) 4 (2), 170-185 © 2020 | E-ISSN: 2579-4213 Kampung Improvement Program: Obstacles and Implementation in Semarang, 1978-1988 | 181 The lack of socialization and open communication to the public regarding the targets for implementing KIP has triggered a misunderstanding between the government and residents affected by KIP. Good communication in general took place when all the existing elements accumulated opinions and accepted all decisions gracefully. Social obstacles faced by the government included problems regarding the provision of clean water in Mlatiharjo ("Realisasi Air Bersih KIP,” 1983). Semarang Water Company became the target of residents' anger because the clean water channels that were ready to drink were not properly distributed according to their designation. In addition, residents protested against Water Company officers who came to check the damage and collect the amount of clean water used by the residents in the village. KIP project that missed Purwosari Perbalan Village for improvement also encountered serious problems. Residents filed a protest to the Mayor on the grounds that the village was classified as slum, densely populated and often traversed by heavy traffic, so, it was a strategic village for Semarang that needed more attention from the government. The complexity of this problem was compounded by the traffic of trucks carrying materials crossing the area for the construction of Drainage Improvement Program (DRIP) and KIP, causing disruption of environmental cleanliness and disturbing environmental hygiene. The residents felt that they had not received justice from the government, which only made their village a mere crossing point for transportation of construction materials (Abdullah et al., 1987). Protests after protests by residents had not been reported much, but this problem had triggered the unsuccessful implementation of KIP in several villages in Semarang. The government even stated in its written remarks that the physical construction that had been conducted in 56 villages was successful. However, Semarang Mayor Imam Soeparto, S.H., felt that the Mayor of Semarang was still lacking in improving the quality of life and behavioral awareness for healthy living in the KIP villages. Therefore, improvement volunteers from the lowest level in the social structure were invited to participate in assisting and empowering residents in KIP villages. Impacts of KIP Implementation The Arrangement of Kampung KIP is an urban improvement fostering project undertaken by the Regional Government (Pemda) at the Second Level Region (Dati II) of Semarang. The Regional Government Semarang in its implementation is based on a series of observations and research on the conditions and situation of villages in Semarang which are conducted by Public Works Office (DPU) of Directorate General of Human Settlements in collaboration with Clarke Urban System Consultant - BIEC International. These institutions then compile a feasibility study as outlined in the Internal Report (English: Interim Report) 1 and 2, as well as the Final. In these reports it is decided that the Kampung Improvement Program (KIP) would be implemented within a period of five years and outlined in the KIP Urban III program from 1979/1980 to 1983/1984, then continued at KIP Urban V 1984/1985 to 1988/1989. Dewi Yuliati, who was involved as IHiS (Indonesian Historical Studies) 4 (2), 170-185 © 2020 | E-ISSN: 2579-4213 Kampung Improvement Program: Obstacles and Implementation in Semarang, 1978-1988 | 182 KIP consultant secretary in Semarang, said that after this project existed, the villages looked clean and tidy. In KIP Urban III, Semarang Government had targeted that for five years from 1979 to 1983 they completed the improvement of 27 villages with a total area of 626.6 hectares and a total population of 207,200 people. Then the results reached 21 villages. Semarang Government continued KIP for the period 1983 to 1987 through KIP Urban V. In its plan, Semarang at least needed fresh funds to continue the project worth IDR 5.6 billion with a target of 35 villages with an area of 600 hectares and a population of 296 thousand people. So, the total villages that had been improved and arranged reached 56 villages. Meanwhile, as the continuation of KIP project, to the residents, it was conducted Tri Bina approach by Semarang Government. Tri Bina included environmental improvement, human improvement, and integrated business improvement. Although in its implementation, it required the seriousness from government because the Mayor still felt that there was still a lack of awareness of residents in post-KIP villages to seriously take care of maternal and child health, family nutrition, clean water, and environmental sanitation. Decreasing on the Community’s Diseases The implementation of KIP Urban III and KIP Urban V brought many changes to the behavior of residents. Symptoms of social pathology appear, indeed, as a result of residents’ poverty who inhabited urban slum villages. Many criminal behaviors appeared situational, because it was squeezed by the economics problems and needed for their children and wives. Situational crimes that often occurred were mugging and theft targeting quiet and poorly guarded places, pickpocketing in crowded places and entertainment centers in Semarang, and thuggery in several public places such as terminals, cinemas, and parking lots in several places, shopping center or entertainment center. Residents who were in such urgency did not usually commit the situational crime in the area where they lived. The impact of their actions eventually led to negative labelling or stigma in villages among Semarang. One of the informant also experienced this situation when he introduced himself as a Krobokan resident. This inherent bad image made the government also anxious and worried, when it distributed aid for poverty alleviation. He was experienced to be invited by the Semarang Government regarding the KIP plan to be implemented in Krobokan. He said that one RK manager alongside Urban Village (kelurahan) had to be socialized and asked repeatedly to ensure that the situation was safe when KIP was implemented. As a result, there were no naughty children or young men hanged out and being drunken at night. Several youths whom he had visited with RT management expressed their shame because they made the village restless. Law enforcement officers did not hesitate on several occasions to conduct surprise reviews in Krobokan Village in 1983, as seen in the Figure 5. IHiS (Indonesian Historical Studies) 4 (2), 170-185 © 2020 | E-ISSN: 2579-4213 Kampung Improvement Program: Obstacles and Implementation in Semarang, 1978-1988 | 183 Figure 5. Babinsa [Village Community Security] and Police Conduct Security Checked in Krobokan, Semarang Source: “Periksa,”, 1983, p. 2. Community Social Groups Improvement Several social community groups grew with the end of KIP, although these social groups had existed long before KIP was implemented. These community social groups included Family Welfare Program (PKK) and Integrated Service Post (Posyandu). KIP development projects that had also been carried out in dozens of slum villages in Semarang City only strengthened the activeness of existing social groups. He still remembered the incessant appeals from the government through neighbourhood (RT), or Hamlet (RW), and urban village administrators to support improvement. The residents of Bandarharjo were grateful that the new village streets had also made the Family Welfare Program, who were not active, became active. Children Under Five Years Old (Toddler) and mothers group were also united to improve health conditions that were lacking, such as children growing stunted and malnourished. The residents of Bandarharjo were grateful that the new village streets had also made the Family Social Program members, who were not active, became active. In 1982 a number of Family Social Program administrators conducted coaching activities for housewives of Family Social Welfare members in entrepreneurship. Family Social Welfare volunteers conducted visits to entrepreneurship units that had been implemented after the KIP program, while handing over stationery assistance for underprivileged Family Social Welfare activists. The improvement of the village had been able to improve social activities, even strengthening its existence such as Family Social Welfare and Integrated Service Post which increasingly had a strong role in society, even though the government had initiated them since before KIP was implemented. IHiS (Indonesian Historical Studies) 4 (2), 170-185 © 2020 | E-ISSN: 2579-4213 Kampung Improvement Program: Obstacles and Implementation in Semarang, 1978-1988 | 184 Conclusion KIP is a government program to improve the housing environment in a slum and unsanitary city. By implementing this KIP, it is expected that the conditions of the houses and the village environment where most of the urban residents live can change through the construction of various physical infrastructure to support their basic needs. KIP was implemented in Semarang started at 1978 and ended at 1988 in two major stages, KIP Urban III and KIP Urban V. KIP is a conceptually very good program because it is aimed at improving village conditions and creating a healthy, clean, and liveable environment. KIP runs according to measured planning, supervision, and implementation and targeted at the slum villages in the lower part of Semarang. However, in implementing KIP in Semarang, it is inseparable from a number of social obstacles which are sufficient to make the village arrangement a little choked up, such as protests due to injustice in improvement and community dissatisfaction with the distribution of land certificates. Moreover, all KIP percentage in Semarang is successful in achieving the physical improvement of village as expected. KIP as a project of great value with a loan amounting to billions of rupiah from the World Bank is able to provide social influence to the people living in several slum villages in Semarang. Semarang KIP is able to bring a new face to Semarang City by physically structuring slum villages, decreasing social pathology in society, and developing and strengthening social groups, such as Integrated Service Post and Family Social Welfare. Semarang Government claims the success of changing the face of the city with the improvements among 56 villages. References Abdullah, H., Lestari, N., Widodo, Sutejo, Masjkuri, N. N. (1987). Tingkat Kesadaran Sejarah Masyarakat Propinsi Jawa Tengah: Kotamadya Semarang. Jakarta: Direktorat Sejarah dan Purbakala. Aminudin, (2015). Fungsi pengawasan DPRD dalam mewujudkan tata kelola pemerintahan yang baik. Jurnal Katalogis, 3 (12). Devas, N. (1981). Indonesia's Kampung Improvement Program: An evaluative case study. Ekistics, 48 (286), 19-36. Retrieved December 15, 2020, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/43620193 DPRD Kodya Semarang setujui perbaikan 27 kampung dengan dana Bank Dunia. (1978, November 20). Suara Merdeka. Hamidah, N. Rijanta, R. Setiawan, B. & Marfai, M. A. (2016). Analisis permukiman tepian sungai yang berkelanjutan, Jurnal Inersia, XII (1) https://doi.org/10.21831/inersia.v12i1.10343 Haryono, A. T. (2008), Perencanaan Jaringan Drainase Sub Sistem Bandarharjo Barat. Semarang: Jurusan Teknik Sipil Fakultas Teknik Universitas Diponegoro. Hasil perbaikan kampung. (1980, August 24). Suara Merdeka. IHiS (Indonesian Historical Studies) 4 (2), 170-185 © 2020 | E-ISSN: 2579-4213 Kampung Improvement Program: Obstacles and Implementation in Semarang, 1978-1988 | 185 Kumala, S. & Yusman, F. (2014). Kajian karakteristik dan metode penanganan kawasan kumuh di Semarang. Jurnal Teknik PWK, 3 (2). https://ejournal3.undip.ac.id/index.php/pwk/article/view/5046 Perbaiki Jalan-jalan kampung. (1978, March 15) Suara Merdeka. Purwantiasning, A. W. (2011). Pola dan strategi perbaikan permukiman kumuh di perkotaan. Jurnal Nalar, 10 (1). https://doi.org/10.24853/nalars.10.1.%25p Realisasi air bersih KIP bukan tanggungan PAM. (1983, July 15). Suara Merdeka. Regional Development Agencies of Semarang (1986). Hasil Penyuluhan Perencanaan Kota dan Program Perbaikan Kampung (KIP) Tahun 1986. Semarang: Bappeda. Simone, A. (2015). The Urban Poor and Their Ambivalent Exceptionalities: Some Notes from Jakarta. Current Anthropology, 56 (S11), S15-S23. doi:10.1086/682283 Soemardi, S. (1972). Kerangka permasalahan: Kebijakan nasional perkembangan perkotaan. Prisma, 7. Terancam banjir Banger. (1982, January 6) Suara Merdeka. Warga Jagalan dan Brumbungan lega: Kalau keberatan dipindah walikota tidak memaksa. (1983, November 26). Suara Merdeka.