www.jsser.org Journal of Social Studies Education Research Sosyal Bilgiler Eğitimi Araştırmaları Dergisi 2020:11 (1), 64-87 64 Beyond Project Compliance: Unintended Social Impact and the Emergency Call for Community Education in West Tarum Canal Pius Suratman Kartasasmita1 Abstract Involuntary resettlement is inevitable in development practices. It refers to a process of moving people to a different place because of government development project. Beyond the conventional studies on involuntary resettlement which usually focus on the issue of fair and just compensations, this study aims to investigate the critical values of community education for resettlement. Using the Risk/Needs/Responsively Model (R-N-R Model) as its conceptual framework, this study has two purposes. First, whether the implementation of resettlement program in West Tarum Canal (WTC) complies with procedures and principles agreed by ADB and GOI in their loan agreement. Second, whether the level of livelihood of affected households after relocation are better off. Accordingly, this study deals with three specific questions i.e. whether the compensation paid is fair and just, whether the conducted training is impactful, and whether the assistance and facilitation provided are helpful. This study employs quantitative research designs. As many as 270 out of 1047 affected households (AHs) dwelling along WTC, are randomly selected as sample. Questionnaires combined with systematic observations, series of FGDs, and structured in-depth interviews are used as instruments for collecting data. Results show that, the implementation of resettlement in WTC is not comply with the set principles and procedures. The livelihood of AHs is not better off after relocations. More specific it is concluded that, the compensation payment given is not fair and just, training programs delivered are not impactful, and assistance and facilitation provided are not helpful. This study ends up with an emergency call for inserting community civic education into resettlement program to replace conventional training and facilitation programs. Further study on understanding the root of community virtuous citizenship, or lack of it, is recommended. Key words: Involuntary Resettlement, Compensation Payment, Risk/Needs/Responsively Model (R- N-R Model), Community Education. Introduction The Integrated Citarum Water Resources Management Investment Program (ICWRMIP) is an ADB funded project carried out by the Directorate General of Water Resources (DGWR), the Ministry of Public Work. This fifteen-year project scheme was planned to cover restoration the entire Citarum River Basin including 10 regencies and 6 municipalities in West Java. 1 Senior Lecturer at Department of Public Administration and Graduate Program in Development Study. Chair of Centre for Human Development and Social Justice (CHUDS), Parahyangan Catholic University, Bandung, Indonesia, pius.gb@unpar.ac.id Kartasasmita Rehabilitation of WTC, among other project components, aims at improving the flow and quality of water that provides 80% of Jakarta’s surface water needs, in addition to supplying the water requirements of industrial establishments and about 52,800 ha of farmland. The WTC runs through district of Karawang, district of Bekasi and Bekasi City. The coverage area of WTC includes 54.2 km out of is 68.3 km long of WTC that has a 100 m right-of-way (ROW), measured at 50 m either side from the center of the canal. Relocation of people who are living along the canal on land belonging to the government and within the easement boundaries of the canal is required. Their assets minus their land, including the buildings, crops and trees are compensated by the WTC project. Loan agreement has requirements and a set of stringent principles on involuntary resettlement which are agreed by both GOI and ADB as part of their Loan Agreement (GOI, 2008). A set of compensation principles, as the key component of resettlement, are assured by ADB. Any compensation gets by the APs should be fair with the assets that they loss during the development project implementation. The price of the compensation that is set by ADB is the principle of replacement cost, while the value of asset is assessed by an independent appraiser. The best price known in the market will be given to the re-settlers so that it will be fair enough for the re-settlers. Yet, the Bank admits that cash for land acquisition has never been a satisfactory mode of compensation if it is not paid at replacement values. In many cases, land-based resettlement programs work better than non-land options. However, such option is not an issue in WTC as the land belongs to the GOI. More elaborated Bank's principles on compensation is indicated in the Resettlement Framework (RF). Comparatively, such compensation principles are also shared by other international development agency such as International Finance Corporation (IFC, 2002). There is strong evidence in WTC that illegal dwellers along the canal do not have any intention to move out from the restricted area, albeit they have received proper amount of compensation payment. Illegal dwellers who were moving out after receiving compensation payment in 2015, are eventually coming back to the restricted area. This evidence is confirmed by 32 short videos created by 101 students at the end of year 2019. Go beyond conventional studies on involuntary resettlement that usually focusing on the issue of whether compensation given is fair and just, this study aims to investigate whether the implementation of resettlement program in WTC complies with procedures and principles agreed by ADB and GOI in their loan agreement and whether the Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2020: 11 (1), 64-87 level of livelihood of AHs after relocation are better off. However, this study moves further beyond compliance issues. It searches for foundation for inserting community civic education into resettlement program to replace conventional training and facilitation programs. In order to deal with such purposes above, there are three specific research questions to deal with. First, whether the compensation paid is fair and just. Second, whether the conducted training is impactful. Third, whether the assistance and facilitation provided are helpful. It is expected that the answer to all three questions exhibits legitimate explanation in accomplishing the purpose of this study. Conceptual Framework R-N-R Model for Resettlement Program This study employs Risk/Needs/Responsively principles (R-N-R Model), initiated in early 1990 by James Bonta, as the main conceptual framework. Within resettlement context, the model basically asserts that treatment, is as much as important, if not more important, than the compensation itself (William H. McNeill and Ruth S. Adams, 2006). R-N-R Model basically stand on three conceptual principles. First, the Risk principles (R); refers to the risk of the Affected Persons (APs) returning back to the restricted area. It is related to – “who to target”-. Second, the Need principles (N); refers to the criminogenic needs and target them in treatment. It is related to – “what to do”- by assessing criminogenic needs and provide effective interventions. Third, the Responsivity principles (R); is related to – “how to do it” – by maximizing the subject (read: illegal dwellers) ability to learn from a rehabilitative intervention by providing cognitive behavioral treatment and tailoring the intervention to their learning style, motivation, abilities and strengths. As it is proven in many cases, this model reduces such reoffending behavior significantly. It uses cognitive-behavioral strategies effective in changing offender behavior (general responsivity), and enhance motivation for individual offenders (specific responsivity). The basic structure of effective correctional programming of R-N-R model: interventions match intensity of treatment to level of risk, specifically target criminogenic needs, and tailor treatment to the personal and interpersonal needs and capacities of participants (Andrews, D. A., et.al., 2004). Leading question behind R-N-R Model falls in the niche of desistance paradigm asserting that instead of starting from the question how practice should be constructed, it begins by asking how change can take Kartasasmita place (William H. McNeill and Ruth S. Adams, 2006). Desistance paradigm principles can be summarized as follow: a. Agency is as important as - if not more important than - structure in promoting or inhibiting desistance from crime. b. Individuals differ in their readiness to contemplate and begin the process of change. c. Generating and sustaining motivation is vital to the maintenance of processes of change. d. Desistance is a difficult and often lengthy process, not an ‘event’, and relapses are common. e. While overcoming social problems is often insufficient on its own to promote desistance, it may be a necessary condition for further progress. f. As people change they need new skills and capacities appropriate to their new lifestyle, and access to opportunities to use them (Spiers, H. J. & Maguire, 2007). Recent development of R-N-R research as applied in Sonoma County-Canada, asserts that instead of using deficit based approach that hinders motivation toward positive change, the revised models emphasis more on building upon existing strengths and motivation, while also being sure to address issues connected with re-offending or criminogenic needs. One of the newer principles in the R-N-R model is to assess personal strengths and integrate them into rehabilitation efforts. The model is not just about risks. It is also a strength-based approach to helping offenders. A research summary from Public Safety Canada Corrections Research led by James Bonta, the prominent figure of this area, provides policy recommendations to ensure that the strengths focus of the R- N-R model is properly applied: a. When developing programs and policies the expanded R-N-R model should be considered and not simply the three principles derived in the 1990 version of the model. b. The assessment of offenders for treatment purposes should integrate the assessment of strengths and motivations. In this way, treatment providers can build upon personal strengths in their efforts to decrease program attrition and reduce offender risk. c. Basic human needs and aspirations are important elements to engagement and success in offender treatment. One of the principles of the expanded R-N-R model is respect for the person. However, one must not lose sight of addressing criminogenic needs. It is by reducing criminogenic needs that offenders are helped to lead a more prosocial lifestyle (Bonta, 2011). Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2020: 11 (1), 64-87 Two research representing the strength-based R-N-R principle results in positive outcomes (Stewart, et.al., 2014; Segeren, et.al, 2020). All these provide foundation to use R-N-R model as a conceptual framework for this study and the following paragraphs provide its logical scheme. Involuntary Resettlement Resettlement is a term used to describe the movement of individual or group from one location to another. It refers to a process of moving people to a different place because they are no longer allowed to stay in the area where they used to live because of government development project (ADB, 2013). There are two types of resettlement, voluntary and involuntary. Mounted reading materials connect resettlement to land acquisition exhibiting how land acquisition is related to resettlement and why the concept is important for understanding resettlement processes (ADB, 2016). Therefore, resettlement is complex and consequential processes (Berlowitz, 1986). In predominantly agriculture society, land is not only a mean for food production nor is a source of livelihood, but also is a symbol of social identity, status, power and wealth. Large-scale and multiple displacements are associated with impoverishment, socio-cultural alienation and up- rootedness. Land acquisition exhibits dramatic social irony resulting in greater poverty level and economic inequality, to include deteriorating conditions for women and children (Amir Afaque Ahmad Faizi, 2014). It seriously impacts vulnerable groups and has something to do with capital concentration and inequality (Akanda, 2014). State policy and public officials are vulnerable in dealing with land acquisition issue (Maitreesh Ghatak, 2011; Sinha, 2014). As such both the ADB and GOI enforce tight principles and procedures as non-compromised element of their loan agreement. Within R-N-R model, resettlement is an effort to mitigate a risk, which is the possibility of the affected people to keep staying or returning back to the restricted area. Compensation Payment Most study on resettlement and land acquisition are focused on the issue of providing fair and just compensation. It is a payment or other replacement to the equal amount of loss assets belong to the affected people (APs) as the most essential element of resettlement process. In the case of WTC Rehabilitation, ADB emphasizes that APs should be at least as well off after resettlement as they were before. Cash compensation is the amount of money given to the APs as a replacement cost Kartasasmita of lands, crops, buildings and other assets loss. Replacement costs are equal to market costs plus transaction costs only if the markets reflect reliable information about prices and availability of alternatives to the assets lost. However, in the context of fair in compensation, it is acknowledged by the Bank that the principle of cash for land acquisition has never been a satisfactory mode of compensation if it is not paid at replacement values (ADB, 1998). Despite the fact that cash compensation could provide opportunities for opening family businesses (Guggenheim, 1990), cash compensation have negative impact (Pokharel, 1988; Kartasasmita, 2014; Partridge, 1989). Most countries have land acquisition laws that require prompt and adequate monetary compensation for persons who lose their land and property. In many others, however, cash compensation exhibits negative consequences, particularly for tribal and other marginal communities. Tribal economies are in large non-monetized, based on reciprocal exchange of goods and services. Therefore, people are not well accustomed to managing cash. There is a popular saying among the Havasupai Apache Indians in the United States, a community who displaced repeatedly by development projects: "Land is like diamonds but money is like ice" (Andrews, D. A., et.al., 2004). Within R-N-R model, dealing with compensation is related with “what to do” question. It is identic with providing effective interventions in dealing with criminogenic needs of the affected persons. Community Education Community Education (CE) is a collective action in developing capacity of individual member of the community as well as capacity of community as a whole in various aspect of community, to include economy as well as social and moral. CE is a community wide structure for communications within neighborhoods, and between neighborhoods and government (Miles, 1974). It is connected to the principles of community development (Harris, 1982) and helps to improve community capacity building in many areas including disaster management (Nielsen, 2005). It is proven as an effective mechanism for recognizing children’s full worth and to reflects the value of family caregiving (Stoney, et.al., 2006). Public investments in such programs have been promoted on the grounds that they can produce high rates of return in the form of academic outcomes, greater employment rates, and reduced crime (Barnett & Ackerman, 2006). In the USA Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2020: 11 (1), 64-87 participation in early community education (ECE) is the norm for three years and four year-old children. CE plays important roles to many aspect of Community Development (CD). It provides adaptive strategy in redefining family roles, and outcomes on family and marital satisfaction (Sweet & Moen, 2007). Community-based initiatives such as Community Garden Education Program, promotes community wellness (D’Abundo & Carden, 2008). CE is important to improve professional capacities of who are working for and with communities (Pletcher, et.al., 1989). It is proven that the intellectual content in the political process is connected to community education (Boggs, 1991). Scientifically, CE is necessary for conducting participatory research (Walter Honadle, 1996). The emerging model for achieving sustainable community-based enterprise learning in connection to CE has been recently developed (Vorley & Williams, 2015). Promoting CE programs is a controversial community issues (Favero, Meyer, & Cooke, 1994). In its history CE is confronted with attempts to address social issues, such as defining more racially inclusive future (Skipper, 2016), developing the core principles of Community Based Tourism (CBT) (Burgos & Mertens, 2017), promoting social justice in tourism planning, racial reconciliation and sustainable community development (Barton & Leonard, 2010). Study on the impact of study collectively for community-led change (Christens & Inzeo, 2015), study on a ‘broken' childhood and parental mental ill-health (McCormack, et.al., 2017), as well as small businesses conducted by Latino minority in urbanized northwest Washington (García-Pabón & Klima, 2017), not to mention the topic of social capital and access to credit appear as one of research focus (Malual & Mazur, 2017), are all representing controversial issues. Recent studies on CE shows that the subject remains influential (Theodori & Theodori, 2015). Asset-Based Community Development and critical learning pedagogy stands to make important contributions to developing an applied critical pedagogy of community development in higher education (Missingham, 2017). Proposal at integrating popular education into a model of empowerment planning is also sound (Bengle & Sorensen, 2017). Schools are now considered as community assets, at least from the perspective of an Asset-Based Community Development (ABCD) approach (Forrester, et.al, 2018). The relevance of family stage, educational level, work involvement, and local community of residence helped predict styles of community involvement (Hofmeister & Edgell, 2015). The roles of women's community organizations especially in Kartasasmita exploring attitudes toward collaboration among board members was also explored (Cumberland, Kerrick, Choi, & Gosser, 2017). Within R-N-R model, inserting community education, in particular community civic education into resettlement process, is critical responsivity. Given literature review above, Figure 1 provides logical framework for conducting this study. Whilst Figure 2 elaborates the steps taken to execute the field survey. Method Research Design This study primarily employs quantitative research designs with post-factum evaluation approach. Fields survey is used as the main data collection method; nonetheless data collected through in- depth interviews of AHs; series of FGDs and participatory observation to include attending village meetings and meeting with project staff; are utilized for interpreting survey results. Videography and photography are also used in visualizing data. In generating conclusions, researcher employs content policy analysis, document analysis and simple non-parametric descriptive statistical analysis. Population and Sample Population is determined based on Updated Resettlement Plan (RP) consists of 1047 AHs. Samples are selected using randomized cluster sampling with 95% level of confidence. This ended up with 315 respondents, but it was decided to provide 50 randomized extra sample as needed. Data Collection Tools Field survey was conducted in 2015 in order to answer the three formulated research questions; whether the compensation paid is fair and just, whether the conducted training is impactful, and whether the assistance and facilitation provided are helpful. It is expected that the answer to all three questions exhibits legitimate explanation in accomplishing the purpose of this study. Questionnaire consists of 97 valid and reliable questions are divided into four (4) sections measuring nine (9) issues, i.e.: 1. Section A contains screening questions regarding AHs demographical identity. 2. Section B contains questions on perception of AHs about replacement cost, allowances, and the resettlement process from data collection to implementing on LRP. Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2020: 11 (1), 64-87 3. Section C contains questions on perception of AHs about facilitation activity. 4. Section D consist questions on perception of AHs about training program. Validity assessment was conducted at 5% significance level and N = 254 people compare to r value on table concludes that the instrument is valid. Test of reliability of a measure results in calculation of Cronbach’s Alpha at 0.960 with 97 number of items. Since the obtained value is higher than 0.90, it is concluded that the instrument has an excellent internal consistency of the items in the scale. Roll-out of instrument was conducted to 20 respondents. Minor revision of wording and structuring were done afterward. Data Collection Survey Phase I (25-27 March 2015) was managed to collect only 150 sample. Content validity test revealed with low quality of data in terms of its reliability in particular related with its internal consistency as well as its content validity. Substantive revision of instrument was done for the second time, both in terms of wording and its structure. Survey plan and strategy was also revised and surveyors were replaced and upgraded to a more skillful group of surveyors. Survey Phase II (7-11 September 2015) researcher employed 6 (six) higher level surveyors to the field for reconfirming the previous respondents who was questioned in survey Phase I. Surveyors were instructed to help respondent to fill a new format of questionnaire based on their previous answers. Surveyors were also instructed to search the “unfound respondent” marked by surveyor in the previous survey Phase I. After almost 5 days of extra efforts and after “three times of visit policy” applied, survey Phase II result in 270 filled questionnaires and 54 information of unreached respondents. Data collected was analyzed using non-parametric descriptive statistics to address all three research questions. Kartasasmita INTENDED/ UNINTENDED COMPLY/NOT COMPLY COMPENSATION PAID AT REPLACEMENT COST TRAINING IS IMPACTFUL ASSISTANCE AND FACILITATION ARE HELPFULL PAYING COMPENSATION CONDUCTING TRAINING PROVIDING ASSISTANCE AND FACILITATION MOVING OUT 1047 AHs FROM THE RESTRICTED AREA PRESERVING LIVELIHOOD OF AHs AT THE SAME LEVEL COMPONENT 2.1 THE INTEGRATED CITARUM WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT INVESTMENT PROGRAM (ICWRMIP) RESETTLEMENT PROGRAM PROGRAM OBJECTIVES PROGRAM ACTIVITIES PERFORMANCE INDICATORS LEVEL OF COMPIANCE PROGRAM IMPACTS Figure 2. Schematic Steps in Conducting Field Survey Figure 1. Logical Framework for Conducting the Study Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2020: 11 (1), 64-87 Data Analysis Data collected through field survey is analyzed using non-parametric descriptive statistics. The results are interpreted and confirmed using qualitative data resulted from series of FGDs, in-depth structured interviews as well as systematic observations. Findings Research Question 1: whether the compensation paid is fair and just. Field survey was conducted to answer the first question above. Nine (9) components of RP and LRP are measured through 97 valid and reliable questions representing principles and procedures agreed by both the ADB as well as GOI. The said nine components are compensation payment, data collection, allowance cost, facilitation for relocation, grievance handling mechanism and public consultation activities. Respondents were asked to express their level of agreement on positive statements for each components using Likert scale i.e. Strongly Agree (5), Agree (4), Neutral (3), Disagree (2) and Strongly Disagree (1). To determine the level of compliance of each component 40% (simply to sum up percentage of “agree” and “strongly agree” categories) as a threshold to divide each element into “comply” if the percentage is equal or above 40% and “not comply” if the percentage is less than 40%. As such Table 1 shows that only 38 % of respondents agree and strongly agree with the overall positive statements regarding the given compensation making this resettlement element falls into “not comply” category. It is noted however, that most respondent agree or strongly agree that amount of replacement cost accordance with the nominative list. Kartasasmita Table 1 Respondent’s Perception about Compensation Payment Compensation Payment Indicator % Agree and Strongly Agree Level of Compliance Amount of replacement cost equal to the market price 38 % Not Comply Amount of replacement cost accordance with the nominative list 53 % Comply Amount of replacement cost could replace affected assets 31 % Not Comply Amount of replacement cost could cover repairing cost of the affected assets 31 % Not Comply Overall Indicator 38 % Not Comply Table 2 shows the perception of respondents about allowance cost they receipt from the project. Based on the overall indicators, only 24 % of respondents agree or strongly agree with the positive statements regarding allowance cost paid by the project. None of six indicator falls into comply category. According to results provided in Table 1 and Table 2, it is confident to note that respondents do not consider the given compensation is fair and just. Table 2 Respondent’s Perception about Allowance Cost Allowance Cost Indicator % Agree and Strongly Agree Level of Compliance The amount of allowance for replacement the loss of income meets the standard of living needs 17 % Not Comply The amount of transportation allowance enough for the relocation cost 15 % Not Comply The payment of allowance goes well 34 % Not Comply The amount of allowance in accordance with the assigned amount 30 % Not Comply The allowance used for purposes other than the relocation process 26 % Not Comply AH feel satisfied with the allowances 18 % Not Comply Overall Indicators 24 % Not Comply Research Question 2; whether the conducted training is impactful. Table 3 shows that based on overall indicators only 24% of respondents are agree or strongly agree that the conducted training is impactful making this element of resettlement fall into “not comply” category. It is clearly noted that none of 16 training indicators falls into “comply” category, so that it is legitimate to note that training activities conducted within the project scheme, according to AHs, have no impact in improving their live conditions. It is noted from Table 3, only Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2020: 11 (1), 64-87 small percentage of respondents (19%) who are agree or strongly agree that they can see the opportunity to earn money with the skills obtained from training activities. Table 4 Respondents’ Perception about Training Activities Training Activities Indicator % Agree And Strongly Agree Level Of Compliance Training proceed as on the schedule 27 % Not Comply Facilitator described the training procedures 26 % Not Comply AHs understand the training procedures 26 % Not Comply AHs understand material described by instructor 26 % Not Comply Instructor explained the material clearly 26 % Not Comply Instructor provide the understandable material 27 % Not Comply Supportive facility given during the training was provided properly 25 % Not Comply Meal given during the training was provided properly 25 % Not Comply Training was met their expectation 22 % Not Comply Training was in accordance with their interest 23 % Not Comply Training was in accordance with their talent 23 % Not Comply AH’s question about the material responded by the instructor 20 % Not Comply Instructors provide a solution for the AH’s questions about the material 20 % Not Comply AHs got a new knowledge from the training 25 % Not Comply AHs can see the opportunity to earn money with the skills obtained from training activity 19 % Not Comply Training activity was useful 21 % Not Comply Overall Indicator 24 % Not Comply Research Question 3; whether the assistance and facilitation provided are helpful. In order to address this research question data in Table 4 shows that based on the overall indicators only small number of respondents (21%) believe that assistance and facilitation provided by the project are helpful. However, as per indicator, there are two indicators demonstrate agreement or strong agreement on the statement. First, respondents agree or strongly agree that facilitator conducted the data collection of the vulnerable group accurately. Second, respondents agree or strongly agree that AHs directly involved in the vulnerable group’s briefing. The rest of 8 indicators fall into “not comply” category since the percentage of respondent who are agree or strongly agree with the helpfulness of assistance and facilitation, are all below 40%. Kartasasmita Table 5 Perceptions of Respondents about Facilitation for Relocation Facilitation for Relocation Indicator % Agree and Strongly Agree Level of Compliance Facilitator conducted the data collection of the vulnerable group accurately 47 % Comply Facilitator describes the relocation procedure of vulnerable group 35 % Not Comply AHs directly involved in the vulnerable group’s briefing 40 % Comply Relocation of vulnerable group goes well 37 % Not Comply Facilitator completely resolve trouble that afflict vulnerable group 29 % Not Comply Facilitator assisting to find a new location 4 % Not Comply Facilitator providing power support for relocation process 3 % Not Comply Facilitator accompanied AH from the beginning until the end of relocation process 4 % Not Comply Facilitator providing the required assistance during relocation process 4 % Not Comply AH satisfied with the relocation facility provided 5 % Not Comply Overall Indicator 21 % Not Comply Similarly, Table 5 shows that based on overall indicators only 31% of respondents agree or strongly agree that their livelihood after relocation are better off so that this resettlement element is “not comply” with the set principles and procedures. However, as per indicator it is noted there are 4 (four) out of 21 (twenty-one) indicators in which the percentage of respondents who are agree or strongly agree that the livelihood of AHs better off after relocation reach 40% or above. These three indicators are, it is easier to approach the place of worship, it is easier to get electricity, it is easier to reach public toilet facility, women and children feel secure as well. Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2020: 11 (1), 64-87 Table 6 Perception of Respondent about Livelihood after Relocation Livelihood After Relocation Indicator % Agree and Strongly Agree Level of Compliance Living standard get better after relocation 9 % Not Comply Household income has increased after relocation 9 % Not Comply Living expenses can be mitigated by the increase of household income 8 % Not Comply It is easier to go to the workplace 35 % Not Comply It is easier to go shopping for household purpose 39 % Not Comply It is easier to go shopping for business purpose 30 % Not Comply It is easier for the children to approach the school 29 % Not Comply It is easier to approach the place of worship 52 % Comply It is easier to approach the public service office 28 % Not Comply It is easier to approach the health facility 29 % Not Comply It is easier to approach the sports facility 20 % Not Comply It is easier to approach the transportation facility 36 % Not Comply It is easier to get clean water 34 % Not Comply It is easier to get electricity 54 % Comply It is easier to get telecommunication facility 36 % Not Comply It is easier to reach public toilet facility 48 % Comply Women and children feel secure 41 % Comply It is easier for vulnerable group to approaching public facility 30 % Not Comply There is much more of public facilities obtained 26 % Not Comply Service quality of public facilitation is better 31 % Not Comply AHs feel satisfied with the public facilitation provided 30 % Not Comply Overall Indicator 31 % Not Comply Summary of Findings Overall findings resulted from field survey can be summarized in Table 6. It is noted there are only two components which are complied with the set principles and procedures agreed by the ADB and GOI, which are data collection and public consultation activities. Kartasasmita Table 7 Level of Compliance of Overall Components of Resettlement Plan (RP) and Livelihood Restoration Program (LRP) Resettlement Plan (RP) and Livelihood Restoration Program (LRP) Component % Agree and Strongly Agree Level of Compliance Compensation payment 38 % Not Comply Data collection 58 % Comply Allowance cost 24 % Not Comply Facilitation for relocation 21 % Not Comply Grievance handling mechanism 25 % Not Comply Public consultation activities 50 % Comply Livelihood after relocation 31 % Not Comply Gender perspective 28 % Not Comply Training activities 24 % Not Comply Overall Element 33 % Not Comply Discussion, Conclusion and Implications Discussions As per Research Question 1, it is noted that the implementation of compensation payment as well as allowance payment are not complied with the set principles and procedures. Since such principles and procedures are designed for ensuring fair and just compensation payment, incompliances can be interpreted as the failure of the project to pay a fair and just compensation. One of the most plausible explanations is that cash compensation, as noted earlier, has never been satisfactory mode of compensation if it is not paid at replacement values (ADB, 1998). So that agreement on what is fair and just compensation hardly ever reached, even if the independent appraisal is conducted. The one and only indicator agreed by respondent related to compensation payment, which is “the amount of replacement cost accordance with the nominative list” (see Table 1). Respondent agreement toward this statement, however, does not explain that they are agree with the amount of the payment on the list. This is confirmed that they are not agree towards three other allowances payment indicators stating that “the amount of allowance for replacement the loss of income meet the standard of living needs, the amount of transportation allowance Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2020: 11 (1), 64-87 enough for the relocation cost, and AH feel satisfied with the allowances.” The novelty of this study supports the previous statement that cash compensation has never been satisfactorily mode of compensation (ADB, 1998). As such it is suggested for future project calling for effective treatments, since it is theoretically legitimate that treatment is as much as important, if not more important, than the compensation itself (William H. McNeill and Ruth S. Adams, 2006). As per Research Question 2, reveals that delivered training programs is not impactful. It can be interpreted within R-N-R model that treatment implemented in the form of training programs provided for AHs are not effective. AHs do not agree towards all 16 stated indicators measuring training programs including towards statement that “AHs can see the opportunity to earn money with the skills obtained from training activity” reaching the lowest percentage of all indicators (19%). Survey results are confirmed by results from participatory observation in more than 10 on- going training programs. Although most training were delivered in relatively professional way by well-trained and experienced trainers, need assessment for determining training materials ware not properly conducted. As the implication, it is not surprising that training programs delivered were “not met with their expectation, neither provided new knowledge nor skills, and therefore were not useful” as indicated in Table 3. Learning from R-N-R model, it is recommended for future project to acquaintance with basic structure of effective correctional programming of R-N-R model asserting that interventions match intensity of treatment to level of risk, specifically target criminogenic needs, and tailor treatment to the personal and interpersonal needs and capacities of participants (Mitchell et al., 2004). As per Research Question 3, it is noted that facilitation is not helpful and the livelihood of AHs after relocation are not better off. Two explanations are plausible. First, by design the project does not include relocation program so that project consultants and facilitators in the field did not prepare themselves to facilitate AHs in any form to find new place to stay. Second, data collection, public consultation activities, grievance handling mechanism, as well as addressing gender issues, in the field are connected and used for executing compensation payment only. There was a moment in one of FGDs with AHs, a field facilitator was discussing transportation allowance without knowing where the AHs will go. For future reference, in care of resettlement that has no relocation involved but dealing with high risk criminogenic needs like that implemented in WTC, treatment Kartasasmita in the form of conventional training and facilitation should be replaced with highly effective correctional treatment. This is related to responsivity principles in R-N-R model in dealing with – “how to do it” – question. It applies principle that highly effective correctional treatment for high risk of criminogenic needs. The community who are living and working illegally along easement boundaries of WTC, can be conceptualized as a community with highly risk criminogenic needs in the form of consciously and illegally occupy the restricted public area, has no intention to move out from or keep coming back to the restricted area although they have received compensation payment to replace their loss. Systematic observation and in-depth structured interview as well as series of FGDs with AHs conducted in 2015; gave strong evidence that the project would not come up with the intended impact i.e. moving illegal dwellers out from the easement boundaries of the canal. It was indicated at that time, firstly, most illegal dwellers aware of their illegal status. Nonetheless, they believed that their residential and business existence within the restricted area was permitted by the canal authority (PJT II). Many of them were officially bound with contract allowing them to live and work within the restricted area. Secondly, it was indicated that AHs are psychologically prepared and ready to voluntarily move out from the area whenever the authority ask to do so. However, AHs saw opportunity to get good compensation at any time the canal authority ask them to move out from the restricted area. In one of meetings among project stake-holders attended by ADB mission, BAPPENAS, the Ministry of Public Works and Housing, BBWS, and project consultants, there was discussion to decide that the fence must be built on both side along the canal. It was meant to be a technical solution for preventing illegal dwellers come back to the restricted area after receiving compensation. Four year later after aforementioned decision, on the 23rd of November 2019, as many as 101 students, divided in a group of three, were assigned to capture the conditions of West Tarum Canal using videography and photography dealing with three questions. First, is there any people who are currently living and working within the easement boundaries of the canal? Second, what is the current condition of fences built along the canal to prevent people enter the restricted area? Third, who are the people now living within the restricted area? Unsurprisingly, as many as 32 short videos reveal with the answers confirming that, first, there are many people are currently Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2020: 11 (1), 64-87 living and working within the restricted area. Second, fencing is apparently not the answer for preventing people to enter the restricted area. Instead, the fence literary functions at providing illegal dwellers with secure private space and protect them from outside attention. Fence in most places, is in poor conditions, either it was forcefully torn down by people or naturally damage due to poor quality and technical design of the fence. Only small part of the restricted area is transformed into beautiful open space i.e. that is closely located to the syphon in Bekasi City. Third, most of people currently living within the restricted area are those who have been living more than ten years and receiving compensation payment related to the rehabilitation of the canal. They are aware of their illegal status within the restricted area, however they are confident for not getting neither legal nor social sanctions. They have no intention to move out from or keep coming back to the restricted area, due to the strategic location for their business with good economic returns, in addition to expecting another compensation payment whenever the canal authority ask them to move out for any reasons. They are always prepared and well organized to grab such opportunity. As such the restricted is a battleground for communal conflicts. Within R-N-R model, this is what literary conceptualized as conditions with highly risk criminogenic needs demonstrating the lack of community virtuous citizenship, that requires highly effective correctional treatments. It cannot be resolved simply by fencing the canal, giving fair and just compensation, or providing conventional training and facilitation programs. The problem is definitely beyond project compliance towards the set principles and procedures. It apparently need an effective correctional treatment in the forms of, first, strong law enforcement. Second, proper design of public space. Third, integrated and impactful community civic education. These three policy recommendations are the most significant contribution of the study. Conclusions This study, as stated earlier, aims to investigate whether the implementation of resettlement program in WTC complies with the set procedures and principles and whether the level of livelihood of affected households (AHs) after relocation are better off. It is concluded that, first, in general the implementation of resettlement related to the rehabilitation of West Tarum Canal is not comply with the set principles and procedures agreed by both the ADB and GOI. Second, the livelihood of Affected Households (AHs) are not better off after relocations. Research findings Kartasasmita elaborate that only two out of nine resettlement component measured are complied with the set principles and procedures, namely data collection activities and public consultation activities. The rest seven other components are not complied to include compensation payment, allowance cost payment, facilitation for relocation, grievance handling mechanism, livelihood after relocation, gender perspective, and training activities. As such based on the three formulated research questions, this study concludes that the compensation paid is not fair and just, the trainings delivered for AHs are not impactful, and the assistance and facilitation programs provided are not helpful. At the end this study ends up with two insightful and serious implications with reference to R-N-R model asserting that treatment of AHs in the forms of trainings program and facilitations, are as important as, if not more important than compensation and allowance payments. However, it is indicated that treatment implemented in the program in the form are not impactful. Pedagogical Implication This study has serious pedagogical implication in the form of emergency call for inserting community civic education and addressing the problem of public virtue as part of resettlement program. It should replace the conventional training and facilitation programs functions as highly correctional treatments in dealing with high risk criminogenic needs of AHs. Community Education (CE) is a collective action in developing capacity of individual member of the community as well as capacity of community as a whole, including economy as well as social and moral. It is a community wide structure for communications within neighborhoods, and between neighborhoods and government (Miles, 1974). For future reference and based on the limitation of specific case study on the resettlement under study in which no relocation involved but dealing with high risk criminogenic needs, it is critical to apply basic principle of R-N-R model asserting that highly effective correctional treatment for high risk of criminogenic needs. Learning from the case of WTC, it is practically recommended that fair and just compensation payment should be remained a central issue of any resettlement program. However, it has to be bared in mind of policy makers, project consultants as well as facilitators involved, that highly effective correctional treatments are critical. Fair and just compensation payment, conventional training and facilitation program, even the compliance towards agreed principles and procedures are not sufficient. Beyond project compliance, it needs stronger law enforcement, proper spatial design for easement boundary of WTC as open public Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2020: 11 (1), 64-87 space, and integrated community civic education. These are recommended as essential correctional treatments to deal with criminogenic needs and the lack of community virtuous citizenship along WTC. Further research dealing with understanding of the root of public virtue, or lack of it, need to be proceed essential for public administration and development studies. References ADB. (1998). Handbook on Resettlement: A Guide to Good Practice. Manila. ADB. (2013). External Monitoring Agency; Final Report on RP Updating and LRP Preparation. ADB. (2016). External Monitoring Agency; Final Report of Land Donation Verification. Akanda, A. (2014). Capital Concentration on Land Ownership in Rural Bangladesh. Journal of Land and Rural Studies, 215–232. https://doi.org/10.1177/2321024914534029 Amir Afaque Ahmad Faizi, T. M. (2014). Contract Farming and Gender Relations in India. Journal of Land and Rural Studies, 191–214. https://doi.org/10.1177/2321024914534041 Andrews, D. A., Bonta, J., & Wormith, S. J. (2004). The Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (LS/CMI. Toronto: Multi-Health Systems. Barnett, W. S., & Ackerman, D. J. (2006). Costs, Benefits, and Long-Term Effects of Early Care and Education Programs: Recommendations and Cautions for Community Developers. Community Development, 37(2), 86–100. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575330609490209 Barton, A. W., & Leonard, S. J. (2010). Incorporating social justice in tourism planning: racial reconciliation and sustainable community development in the Deep South. Community Development, 41(3), 298–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575330903444051 Bengle, T., & Sorensen, J. (2017). Integrating popular education into a model of empowerment planning. Community Development, 48(3), 320–338. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575330.2016.1264441 Berlowitz, A. J. (1986). Land Acquisition in Developing Countries. Fordham International Law Journal, 10(4). Boggs, D. L. (1991). Campaigning and Community Development: The Self-Education of a Political Candidate. Journal of the Community Development Society, 22(2), 22–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575339109489938 Bonta, J. (2011). Strengths and Human Needs in Offender Rehabilitation. Research Summary. Public Safety Canada, 16(5). Retrieved from Kartasasmita http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/strgnths-rhb/strgnths-rhb-eng.pdf Burgos, A., & Mertens, F. (2017). Participatory management of community-based tourism: A network perspective. Community Development, 48(4), 546–565. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575330.2017.1344996 Christens, B. D., & Inzeo, P. T. (2015). Widening the view: situating collective impact among frameworks for community-led change. Community Development, 46(4), 420–435. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575330.2015.1061680 Cumberland, D. M., Kerrick, S. A., Choi, N., & Gosser, K. (2017). Women’s community organizations: Exploring attitudes toward collaboration among board members. Community Development, 48(1), 30–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575330.2016.1242147 D’Abundo, M. L., & Carden, A. M. (2008). “Growing Wellness”: The Possibility of Promoting Collective Wellness through Community Garden Education Programs. Community Development, 39(4), 83–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575330809489660 Favero, P., Meyer, N., & Cooke, S. (1994). Conducting Educational Programs on Controversial Community Issues. Journal of the Community Development Society, 25(1), 49–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575339409489894 Forrester, G., Kurth, J., Vincent, P., & Oliver, M. (2018). Schools as community assets: an exploration of the merits of an Asset-Based Community Development (ABCD) approach. Educational Review. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2018.1529655 García-Pabón, J., & Klima, K. (2017). Latino small businesses in northwest Washington: Perceptions, challenges, and needs. Community Development, 48(3), 370–384. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575330.2017.1301976 GOI. (2008). No Title ADB Project No. 37049-02 INO: Integrated Citarum Water Resources Management Investment Program (ICWRMIP) West Tarum Canal Resettlement Plan. Guggenheim, S. (1990). “Development and the Dynamics of Displacement.” Workshop on Rehabilitation of Displaced Persons. Workshop on Rehabilitation of Displaced Persons. Bangalore: Institute for Social and Economic Change and Myrada. Harris, I. M. (1982). An undergraduate community education curriculum for community development. Journal of the Community Development Society, 13(1), 69–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575330.1982.9987142 Hofmeister, H., & Edgell, P. (2015). The relevance of place and family stage for styles of Journal of Social Studies Education Research 2020: 11 (1), 64-87 community involvement. Community, Work & Family, 18(1), 58–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668803.2014.939142 IFC. (2002). Handbook for Preparing a Resettlement Action Plan. 6. Kartasasmita, P. S. and S. L. (2014). Laporan Akhir Profile Sosial Ekonomi Masyarakat Kawasan Inlet Waduk Saguling. Bandung. Maitreesh Ghatak, P. G. (2011). The Land Acquisition Bill: A Critique and a Proposal. Economic & Political Weekly EPW, 65–72. Malual, J. D., & Mazur, R. E. (2017). Social capital and access to credit in post-conflict Lira, northern Uganda. Community Development, 48(4), 566–581. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575330.2017.1321559 McCormack, L., White, S., & Cuenca, J. (2017). A fractured journey of growth: making meaning of a ‘Broken’’ childhood and parental mental ill-health.’ Community, Work & Family, 20(3), 327–345. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668803.2015.1117418 Miles, L. M. (1974). Can Community Development and Community Education be Collaborative? Journal of the Community Development Society, 5(2), 90–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103829.1974.10878044 Missingham, B. D. (2017). Asset-based learning and the pedagogy of community development. Community Development, 48(3), 339–350. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575330.2017.1291528 Mitchell, K. E., Lohmann, D., Houser, P. R., Wood, E. F., Schaake, J. C., Robock, A., … Bailey, A. a. (2004). The multi-institution North American Land Data Assimilation System (NLDAS): Utilizing multiple GCIP products and partners in a continental distributed hydrological modeling system. J. Geophys. Res., 109(D7), D07S90--. https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JD003823 Nielsen, S. W. (2005). Public Education for Disaster Management: A Phenomenographic Investigation. 1–393. Partridge, W. L. (1989). Land Acquisition and Resettlement in Asia. Washington DC. Pletcher, D. D., Walther, C. H., & McConocha, D. M. (1989). The Influence of Planners’ Educational Training on the Community Economic Development Process. Journal of the Community Development Society, 20(2), 72–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575338909489984 Pokharel, J. C. (1988). “Population Displacement by the Kulekhani Hydroelectric Project: Some Kartasasmita Lessons for Compensation Planning.” Prashasan: The Nepalese Journal of Public Administration, 2(51), 7–13. Segeren, M., Fassaert, T., Wit, M. De, & Popma, A. (2020). Constellations of youth criminogenic factors associated with young adult violent criminal behavior. Crime Science, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40163-020-0111-2 Sinha, B. (2014). Land Reforms: Evidences of Reversal in Orissa. Journal of Land and Rural Studies, 2(2), 171–190. https://doi.org/10.1177/2321024914534048 Skipper, J. (2016). Community development through reconciliation tourism: The behind the Big House Program in Holly Springs, Mississippi. Community Development, 47(4), 514–529. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575330.2016.1146783 Spiers, H. J. & Maguire, E. A. (2007). A navigational. Hippocampus, 17(8), 618–626. Stewart, L. A., Gabora, N., Kropp, P. R., & Lee, Z. (2014). Effectiveness of Risk-Needs- Responsivity-Based Family Violence Programs with Male Offenders. Journal of Family Violence, 29(2), 151–164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-013-9575-0 Stoney, L., Mitchell, A., & Warner, M. E. (2006). Smarter Reform: Moving Beyond Single- Program Solutions to an Early Care and Education System. Community Development, 37(2), 101–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575330609490210 Theodori, A. E., & Theodori, G. L. (2015). The influences of community attachment, sense of community, and educational aspirations upon the migration intentions of rural youth in Texas. Community Development, 46(4), 380–391. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575330.2015.1062035 Vorley, T., & Williams, N. (2015). Creating and sustaining a model of community-based enterprise learning: a participatory case study of ready hubs. Community Development, 46(5), 559–579. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575330.2015.1049281 Walter Honadle, B. (1996). Participatory Research for Public Issues Education: A Strategic Approach to a Municipal Consolidation Study. Journal of the Community Development Society, 27(1), 56–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575339609489849 William H. McNeill and Ruth S. Adams. (2006). Human Migration: Patterns and Policies. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.