Layout Februari 2016 The Implications of Gated Society in Jakarta Metropolitan Region: A Multiple-Case Study in Tangerang District, Banten, Indonesia INDAH SURYA WARDHANI Affiliated to Research Centre for Politic and Government, at Department Politics and Govern- ment (PolGov), Universitas Gadjah Mada, Email: indahsuryaw@gmail.com ABSTRACT This paper argued that the gating system intensifies existing divergence of the gated communities and the kampung communities. The significant dissimilarities between the residents and the dwellers strongly indicate social inequality. The notion of gated society at the neighborhood level remains problematic. The existence of for- tress raises some ethical questions whether the rich, the high-level professional, and the famous have right to fort to themselves and keep other citizens out, whether they have privilege to set the boundaries and live separately from society as well as maintain the amenities exclusively. The gated society inevitably brings enormous policy consequences. This paper recommend housing policy as social legislation to regulate the notion of gated society. The long term practices of exclusion within fortress, and public space privatization will impede the function and very idea of the future citizenship. Beyond social redistribution, the principle idea of housing policy is promoting inclusive right for sustainable development. The absence of the inclusiveness results in a decline of democracy. Keyword: gated community, social segregation, inequality, housing policy, citizen- ship INTRODUCTION The setting of boundaries is always a political act since bound- aries determine space and membership thereby to facilitate the pur- poses of political, economic, and social life (Blakely, E.J. and Snyder, Recieved 11 January 2016; Accepted 16 January 2016 http://dx.doi.org/10.18196/jgp.2016.0025 128-152 ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ 129 ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ Vol. 7 No. 1 February 2016 M.G., 1997). Gated community is the dramatic forms of the new residential space that was previously integrated with the larger shared civic space. It is believed that dispersion of gated communities throughout Jakarta Metropolitan Region (JMR) has been associated with emerg- ing of new towns development in the last two decades. They are built in the urban periphery and constructed largely as exclusive residential with excellent infrastructures and urban lifestyle ameni- ties, as well as 24-hours security system. Despite of economic crisis in 1998, new towns development has been promising property businesses spreading toward the outskirt. The number of new town in JMR is growing vividly in the las de- cade. There had been 23 new towns projects by nearly 260 develop- ers ranging from 500 to 6,000 ha in size at the end of 2001 (Firman, 2004). A decade later, Real Estate Indonesia (REI), an association of Indonesia’s corporate housing developers, claimed that there are 25 new towns covering very more or less 21,000 ha size in total (Ganie, 2010). The earliest new town project apparently responded the Instruc- tion of President no 13/1976 of Development of Jakarta Metropoli- tan Area.1 The policy prescribed enforcement of secondary growth centers in outskirts of Jakarta by generating investments for trade and industry activities as well as residential in suburbs. The policy positively enhanced industrial estates to develop new town as self- contained neighborhoods (kota mandiri) complete with urban and employment centers to decline congestion in city center of Jakarta in 1980s. The several highway projects of JMR were launched in the early 1980s and Law no 4/1992 of Housing and Settlements fertil- ized the spreading of new town enriched conurbation area.2 As can be seen, the first policy fostered opening access of sub- urbs increased the absorption of investment while the second boosted broad expansion of private industrial estates. Those poli- http://dx.doi.org/10.18196/jgp.2016.0025 128-152 130 ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ JOURNAL OF GOVERNEMENT & POLITICS cies result consequences, including reducing carrying capacity of the metropolitan core and increasing carrying capacity of the fringes on the one hand, as well as highlighting privatization of planning on the other hand (Hudalah, D. and Firman, T., 2012). The follow- ing figure shows magnitude of new town and its gated communities in generating new spatial pattern of residencies in JMR. FIGURE 1: SPREAD OF NEW TOWN IN JMR Source: (Herlambang, 2011) The notion of new towns and gated communities spread through- out the outskirts of JMR positive as well as negative externalities. It may have desirable effects at the sub-national and district level of administration, by increasing average income in suburbs and de- creasing economic gap with DKI Jakarta. Moreover, the dispersion http://dx.doi.org/10.18196/jgp.2016.0025 128-152 131 ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ Vol. 7 No. 1 February 2016 of gated communities often comes along with the development of amenities and utilities, such as streets and commercial business dis- tricts. However, the implications of gated community at the neighbourhood level tend to bring disadvantages since it disperses vastly in the villages, which are the original kampungs of native eth- nic. Based on the research, this paper explains the implications of gated communities in Jakarta Metropolitan Region. The research on a multiple-case of gated communities with varying continuum of disclosure at Tangerang District, Province of Banten provided evidences on how gated communities intensify differentiation and inequality in the society, decline social integration, and discourage the authority of local government. Hence, this paper attempts to argue the undesirable impacts of gated community at the neighbor- hood level, notably social segregation and withdrawal citizenship. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK Gated community has been defined in varies ways. Basically, it is identified by the setting of boundary and territory. They define gated community as residential areas with restricted access in which secu- rity developments with designated perimeters, usually walls or fences and controlled entrances (Blakely, E.J. and Snyder, M.G., 1997). Similar definition, a gated society is defined as a residential devel- opment surrounded by walls, fences, or earth banks covered with bushes and shrubs, with a secured entrance (Low S., 2003, p. 11). Unlike the condominium building or apartment, gated community are different in terms of their fences, boundaries, and territories, precluding public access to streets, playground, sidewalks, parks, beaches, rivers, and all utilities, which without fences will be open and shared by all citizen of a locality. Regarding the fortress and enclosure, gated communities are often associated with a ‘culture of fear’ and risk experienced within the http://dx.doi.org/10.18196/jgp.2016.0025 128-152 132 ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ JOURNAL OF GOVERNEMENT & POLITICS city center. The discourse of urban fear encodes other social con- cerns including class, race, and ethnic exclusivity as well as gender (Low S. M., 2001). Security zone and gating system defend of crime and outsider (Blakely, E.J. and Snyder, M.G., 1997). Considering the continuum of enclosure, there are eight classifi- cation of gates based on two common appearances, i.e. how the marking of boundary and how the existing control of the main en- trance (Grant, J. and Mittelsteadt, 2004). Wall creates “demarca- tion” which restricts access of undesirable people or subgroups as part of response to the fear of crime, violence to people, and pov- erty (Thorns, 2002). Not only reflecting the fear, the fortified en- clave is treated as a spatial expression of increasing urban conflict (Manzi, T. and Bowers, B.S., 2006). Hence, to live within the fortress and wall might create the sense of community. The communities perceive collective identity of them- selves by encouraging sense of collective life naturally like in local area and also selective act of imagination like the same impulse life (Sennett, 1976). Gated community is categorized into three typologies based on the functions, i.e. lifestyle community, prestige commu- nity, and security zone community (Blakely, E.J. and Snyder, M.G., 1997). The important social values in residents’ consideration are sense of community, exclusion, privatization, and stability. It reflects not just feeling but also participation in the social life of a place that implies sharing of territory, particularly social interaction, includ- ing identity, values, desires, and common goals as well as maintain- ing social ladder. Furthermore gated community has been classified as residential with legal agreements consideration, which tie the residents to a common code of conduct and collective responsibility. A legal frame- work means allow the extraction of monies to maintain of common utilities and services combine with a physical structure, which in- clude gated and walls enclosing space (Atkinson, R. and Blandy, S., http://dx.doi.org/10.18196/jgp.2016.0025 128-152 133 ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ Vol. 7 No. 1 February 2016 2006). This definition also considers as economic terms as a conceptualization of holding property right developed through col- lective action of individual for individual. In similar definition, gated community is clarified as club goods due to the excludability of use by its pricing and membership requirements (Manzi, T. and Smith- Bowers, B., 2006).The privatized enclosures of public space aimed community homeowner control. They intensify exclusionary land use practices in place shows how struggles emerge between commu- nities and districts over tax payments for public services that have been privatized behind the gates and walls of such communities (Low S., 2003). To sum up, the setting of boundaries is always a political act since boundaries determine space and membership. It is underlined the gated community brought policy consequences since it is clari- fied as club goods which has legal framework which allows some citizens have economic and social privilege, sets walled territory, excludes others citizens as well as withdrawals from public contact. The implications of gated communities on segregation are per- sistently discussed since the experiences and externalities had dif- ferent effects on different levels of administration. Gated commu- nity has positive externalities such as improving a physical environ- ment, job opportunity, a modern image toward surrounding area (Alvarez-Rivadulla, 2007), reduce the scale of residential segrega- tion between city centre and suburbs by increasing land price, spread- ing middle-upper income groups throughout the city, decreasing economic gap, and promoting some forms of urban facilities (Salcedo, R. and Torres, A., 2004) (Sabatini, F. and Salcedo, R., 2007). It is believed that gated community brings high investing on ur- ban infrastructure, highways, fibre optic and telecommunication networks (Hudalah and Firman 2012, Sabatini and Salcedo 2007). The development stimulates the dynamic of the contemporary sub- http://dx.doi.org/10.18196/jgp.2016.0025 128-152 134 ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ JOURNAL OF GOVERNEMENT & POLITICS urban in outskirts of metropolis Jakarta as a global trend of post- suburbia (Hudalah and Firman 2012). Despite urban sprawl, new town has been claimed creates new opportunities, which involves concentration of hi-tech industries and multinational companies, converting formerly neglected rural hinterland into suburban in- dustrial estates. New town reflects cultural integration since the resi- dents mostly are migrants from other regions in Indonesia, even expatriates, who have cultural diversity of ethnic and religion (Leisch, 2002). On the contrary, these undesirable impacts became evidences in neighbourhood level. Gated community implies negative conse- quences as a kind of a new housing market, which is a symbol of metropolitan fragmentation (Le Goix, 2005). A walled quarter as- sociates with urban inequality (Vaselinov et al. 2007) and separa- tion with social context and different social groups (Le Goix 2005, Atkinson and Flint 2004). The dispersion of gated communities indicates how the private interests take over public space by zoning, taxes and incorporation of gated communities (Low, Setha, 2006). The expansion of new towns development in JMR also parallels with gentrification by rising land prices in the periphery and in some cases displaces established communities. The massive devel- opments of new towns in outskirts of Jakarta denote land specula- tive by private developers, facilitated by government, which has been a vast land ownership transfer from the previous landowners, mostly disadvantage farmers to the new town developers. They tend to in- vade suburban areas where are home or original village of Betawi or Sundanese ethnics - indigenous ethnic inhabiting in Bogor, Depok, Tangerang, and Bekasi (Firman 2004). In brief, the existing knowledge could not answer precisely the implication of gated community on social-spatial segregation since gated communities brought different evidence at different levels of governance. Gated communities as the private communities is a http://dx.doi.org/10.18196/jgp.2016.0025 128-152 135 ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ Vol. 7 No. 1 February 2016 response to national and sub-national governments’ (municipal and district level) failure to provide adequate neighbourhood services and supply services in rapidly growing areas. However, the disper- sion of gated communities in neighbourhood level tend to brought undesirable impact since it invades kampungs and often displaces the native communities. The idea of public sphere as an arena of political deliberation and participation is fundamental to democratic governance. In Habermas’ account, the ideal of public sphere is supposed univer- sal and thereby in any meaningful sense, spatially undifferentiated. It is implies that the spatial changing has impact to the public delib- eration in the public space (Low, S. and Smith, N. (ed), 2006). In other words, there are the relationship between public space and the public sphere (Harvey, 2006). Equally important, the notion of citizenship is very complex that characteristic and dimensions remain open for competing concep- tion. A critical geography introduced the political continuum of space - from territory, scale, to sphere – has formed the intercon- nected dimensions of the citizenship, notably membership, legal status, rights, and participation (Stokke, 2014). With this intention, the implication of gated communities has emerged by a critical geography of space that brought into studies of citizenship, social policy decision making, and setting up the “right to the city”. The contemporary political economy has underlined the importance of understanding the space, which identity politics, citizenship, and political agendas are articulated and struggled over (McCann, 2002, pp. 77-79). It is believed that the patterns of gated communities have demonstrated some of the ways that public sphere is affected by physical urban forms of residential organization (Donoso, 2009). Furthermore, the property right permits association of residents enhances self-governance in maintaining common utilities by pric- http://dx.doi.org/10.18196/jgp.2016.0025 128-152 136 ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ JOURNAL OF GOVERNEMENT & POLITICS ing and exclusive membership requirements (Atkinson, R. and Blandy, S., 2006) (Blakely, E.J. and Snyder, M.G., 1997). Here the issue is less one of replacing failing city services that controlling residential space (Blakely, E.J. and Snyder, M.G., 1997). It is not surprising that those who can afford to turn public services to pri- vate service provision do, such as privatizing their streets and buy- ing security, and other services on the private markets. In other words, space privatization by fortress and enclosure pro- vides the sense of community for those who are ‘members’ rather than ‘citizens’. The setting of boundaries is always a political act since boundaries determine space and membership (Blakely, E.J. and Snyder, M.G., 1997). Gated community is clarified as club goods due to the excludability of use by its pricing and membership re- quirements (Manzi, T. and Smith-Bowers, B., 2006). In the long run, gated communities brought consequences on public sphere due to their wall and legal status. The privileges in political economy constructs exclusion brought inequality issue that hampered the citizenship. RESEARCH METHOD The scope of the study is to examine the implications of gated society at the neighborhood level, and to what extent gating im- pacts on citizenship. This study is based on gated communities lo- cate at three private estates territories in Tangerang District. The three territories are close each to other, established on the total area up to 5,000 hectares. Those are in the outskirt area, where are around 25 kilometers from Jakarta City center. The selected cases have different features on marking the bound- aries and continuum controls of the main entrance. The three cases are Block Thin Islamic Village with enable-gating case, Sector 7 A/ B Gading Serpong with semi restricts gating, Lestari Cluster Lippo Karawaci with full restrict-gating case. The following table presents http://dx.doi.org/10.18196/jgp.2016.0025 128-152 137 ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ Vol. 7 No. 1 February 2016 the continuum of enclosures and varying features differences on the cases. TABLE1. THE FEATURES OF GATED COMMUNITIES3 Source: (Wardhani, 2012) This research is an exploratory one, as it attempts to elaborate the implications of gated community as a contemporary phenom- enon toward a context of social segregation in JMR. Since the bound- aries between the phenomenon and the context are not evidence, this research applied a multiple-case design to strive optimum ex- ploration on phenomenon of gated communities (Yin, 1991). Hence, the slightly different outcomes are expected, which every case serves a specific purpose within the overall context of inquiry. To describe the phenomenon, the study aims for objective analy- sis. Hence, the study applies a set of instruments to construct a triangulation of data (Yin, 1991). The applied instruments for data collection methods are below: http://dx.doi.org/10.18196/jgp.2016.0025 128-152 138 ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ JOURNAL OF GOVERNEMENT & POLITICS - Participant observation using semi-structured observation guide: It intends to capture dynamic of the communities, how each community perceiving identity, sharing tract, and activities of intragroup and intergroup relation in the daily life. - Survey using structured questionnaires. Questionnaire is con- sidered as an efficient way for assembling responses from a large sample prior to quantitative overview analyses (Saunders et al. 2003). Targeted households are selected by simple random based on their site plots of the house. The targeted respondent to an- swer the questionnaire is member of the household, who has minimum age 17 years old or already married. - In-depth interview with semi-structured questions. It is mainly looking for qualitative data in capturing rich understanding of perception and more insight of causal processes. Targeted respon- dents of in-depth interview are selected purposively determined by snowball methods. - Secondary resources are from documents, such as regulation, publications, etc. The study applies a multiple-case design with three selected cases of gated communities within the three private estate territories in Tangerang District. This study took sample purposively on one clus- tered residence, which is close to the native sub village (kampung). Each case compounds of a gated community and a kampung com- munity in its vicinities. Each case can provide a valuable insight despite the limitation is more difficult to justify extending the re- sults and conclusion to larger population (Black 1993b). The se- lected cases are: (1) Block Thin and Kampung Kalipaten in the Is- lamic village; (2) Sector 7 A/B and Kampung Cicayur Kaler in Gading Serpong Township; (3) Lestari Cluster and Kampung Peusar in Lippo Karawaci Township. To select the respondents, the study applies two sampling meth- http://dx.doi.org/10.18196/jgp.2016.0025 128-152 139 ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ Vol. 7 No. 1 February 2016 ods. First is the simple random sampling on the location of houses to get total 167 respondents (not including 23 respondents, who rejected). Second is the snowballing sampling to seek 30 respondents in three cases, as well as 5 respondents from the authority’s side for answering semi-structured questions of in depth interviews. FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS This part presents findings and the analysis. It confirmed that quantitative data from the survey brought the general pattern of the gated communities in terms of state of opinion and attitude of people as quantitative data while qualitative data from in-depth in- terview captured the rich understanding beyond the general pat- tern. The statistic tests the influence of explanatory variable (X) and dummy variable (D) to dependent variable (Y) the opinion toward enclosure. It confirmed that opinion toward enclosure tend to be neutral (mean 3.4/5.00), in terms of gating: walled territory, CCTV monitoring, 24-hours security, and checking gates for visitors. Statistic tested how strong the influence of explanatory variable (X) and dummy variable (D) of the affected variable (Y). With the stepwise, only six of 14 variables which can be analyzed further as it have a strong correlation with the affected variable (Y). Here are the results of multiple regressions to the processing of correlation X and Y. T (0,788) (0,001) (0,000) (0,001) (0,043) (0,014) (0,024) se (0.215) (0.162) (0.062) (0.60) (0.124) (0.072) (0.179) R² (0.454) * The variations of explanatory variables (X) and dummy variables (D) or model explained 45.4 % toward enclosure (Y). The rest may be explained by the others. http://dx.doi.org/10.18196/jgp.2016.0025 128-152 140 ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ JOURNAL OF GOVERNEMENT & POLITICS * Durbin Watson = 1,626 (1