Financing Slum Upgrading In Indonesia: Can Sustainability Reinvestment Help?

Informal Settlements and Affordable Housing 2009

IV - 19

3-3

Financing Slum Upgrading in Indonesia: Can Sustainability Reinvestment Help? Agung Sugiri3

ABSTRACT Sheltering for the urban poor of developing countries, like Indonesia, has been facing problems. Slums, characterised by crowded, unhealthy environment, poor quality buildings, and lacking public facilities and infrastructure have been of much concern. Around 24-62% of urban population in developing countries live in this kind of housing with no sign of decreasing trend. Despite promising progresses, sustainability is still the main challenge for slum upgrading, in which financing is an important aspect. The paper seeks a theoretical foundation of utilising sustainability reinvestment scheme, a somewhat forgotten function in Indonesia, to help financing slum upgrading. Sustainability reinvestment is among the methods of ensuring intra- and inter-generational equity in development, in which a significant portion of development benefits is reinvested for sustaining development. It is usually applied for restoring environmental damage caused by the development activities based, among others, on polluters pay principle. However, since hardly are people living in slums out of their freewill, inequity in development process must have something to do with it. Slum inhabitants are most probably deprived from their rights to get equitable benefits from development. Therefore, the application of sustainability reinvestment can be extended to include financing slum upgrading. By this, slum upgrading becomes an integrated part in ensuring sustainable development. Among the policy implications is tax policy reformulation. A new post in the tax yield, namely sustainability reinvestment pool, can be created. Equitable

3 Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Diponegoro University Jl. Prof. Soedarto SH, Tembalang, Semarang 50275, [email protected]

IV - 20

Sustainable Slum Upgrading In Urban Area

compensation for slum dwellers should be available from this post, and this would help financing slum upgrading. Keywords: intra- and inter-generational equity, slum upgrading, sustainable development, sustainable financing. 1. INTRODUCTION Slum upgrading has become a favourable alternative solution to increase the quality of life of slum dwellers. However, slum demolition without proper resettlement program is still preferred by many local governments. This is especially so in Indonesia, despite its former successful experience of slum upgrading –KIP (Kampung Improvement Program)- in Jakarta. This introduction shows the importance of sustaining slum upgrading, and is also completed with the objective, the method, and the organisation of the paper. 1.1 Slum Bulldozing versus Slum Upgrading A group of people gathered together in front of the World Bank office in Makassar, protesting the practices of slum demolition, recently widespread in Indonesian metropolitan areas and big cities (WALHI, 2004). These people, mainly the worse off citizens like the urban poor, informal street vendors, victims of slum bulldozing, and students, were coordinated by KMMAP (Makassar People’s Committee on Anti Deprivation). They even expanded their complaint to include refusal to all World Bank initiatives on urban development, especially the “cities without slums” program, which they blamed as causing slum removals without proper resettlement programs by local governments. While their rejection to the World Bank programs is most probably because of some misunderstanding (see e.g. Dasgupta and Lall, 2006; World Bank, 2000), their suffering of being displaced from their homes is real. The upshot of the incidence is clear, that slum bulldozing is most certainly not the best option for local governments. This, however, has not been the case for Indonesia. Centre on Housing Rights and Eviction, for example, has identified Indonesia as a country with the highest incidence of slum removals, mostly done in Jakarta, in 2003 (Hartiningsih, 2005). From 2000-05, the Local Government of Jakarta has forced more than 90,000 slum dwellers to move out from their homes, and threatened another 1.5 million of the urban poor. The Jakarta Government also made more than 20,000 ‘becak’ drivers and 60,000 street vendors lost their jobs in that five year period. Slums are often deemed as merely a housing disorder by urban local governments of Indonesia because of their illegal nature in land tenure.

Informal Settlements and Affordable Housing 2009

IV - 21

Furthermore, the ugliness of slums due to the crowded, poor quality buildings, unhealthy environment, combined with lacking public facilities and infrastructure has made the authority keen enough to eliminate them. Thus, to upgrade slums or to provide resettlements is considered too costly. Besides, upgrading would mean allowing the dwellers to stay there illegally, something paradoxical. Slum dwellers are considered as having no rights to stay. So, as far as the local authority is concerned, rather than to cure the disorder, it is much easier to remove it. However, pondering on the concerns of the slum dwellers, slum removals would most probably make the worse off worst. Around 24-62% of urban population in developing countries live in slums with no sign of decreasing trend (UN-Habitat, 2008 in Servants, 2009). It is indicated that many slum dwellers are in worse situation than their relatives in rural areas (UN-Habitat, 2006). By bulldozing them, at least two disadvantages would emerge. First, slum bulldozing would decrease the housing supply and make the dwellers unsheltered. Rather than going back to their origin in rural areas, these unsheltered urban poor would most probably find other places to quickly build their new slums. Slum bulldozing has been proven by experience as unable to eliminate slums (Painter et al., 2006). Second, slum dwellers usually run their economic activities not too far from home. Removing them would cut their opportunities, and thus reduce the urban economic potential itself. This is also paradoxical because slum dwellers, although deprived, are not without economic potential. Not only are they potential consumers in the urban economy, but potential producers as well. Slum dwellers are engaged in informal, small and micro enterprises, which are low productive. However, an interesting proposition is stated by Prahalad (CHF International, 2008: Appendix 4-2), that “If we stop thinking about the poor as victims or as a burden and start recognizing them as resilient and creative entrepreneurs and value-conscious consumers, a whole new world of opportunity will open up.” Integrating the informal activities of slum dwellers into the urban economy in terms of strengthening the opportunities, by giving them fair access to micro financial assistance, for example, is thus among the important strategies of urban development. Slum upgrading, therefore, is much more preferable than slum bulldozing in implementing “city without slum” program. It is true that slum upgrading is usually more costly than slum removal. It also needs more effort and time, however, these investments are effective and productive. While slum removal would most probably end up with similar new problem in other parts of the city, slum upgrading can resolve it. By slum improvement, slums can be converted into good quality settlement without relocating the dwellers, so that maintaining their economic opportunity. Slum upgrading can also empower the community to renovate and develop their housing with their own resources. Suitable and inexpensive housing for the urban poor, rather than a decline in the housing supply, is thus the main outcome of slum upgrading (Painter et al., 2006).

IV - 22

Sustainable Slum Upgrading In Urban Area

1.2 Challenge to Sustain Slum Upgrading Progress in slum upgrading has been made so far, however, sustainability is still the main challenge (Serageldin et al., 2003). Indonesia, for instance, has a successful experience in slum upgrading. Kampung Improvement Program (KIP) of Jakarta, also known as Muhammad Husni Thamrin (MHT) project, was initiated in the late 1960s (Kompas, 2000) when the deceased Ali Sadikin was the Governor. KIP is often considered among the best practices of slum upgrading in the world, and in its peak performance in the 1970s, KIP was able to upgrade up to 2,000 hectares per year (Chavez et al., 2000). However, the program is unsustainable due to some reasons discussed in this subsection. Chris Banes, the former Municipal Engineer at the World Bank, expresses that “never has any other slum upgrading project been as successful as the KIP and improved the quality of life of such a large part of the population” (Chavez et al., 2000). KIP has played a significant role in increasing the quality of life of slum dwellers through providing access to affordable facilities and infrastructure, and improving urban environmental quality. Banes continues stating that the inhabitants “are now better educated, household size has declined, and more residents are employed.” (Chavez et al., 2000). Key factors to the success of KIP can be inferred from the experience (Chavez et al., 2000). The first is that the initiative came from the Governor Ali Sadikin, which was then supported by the community. This is essential, because self awareness is just like bottom up initiative that can help empowering local community. With the improvement and provision of affordable infrastructure and facilities, the communities were encouraged to renovate and build their houses with only a little help from the government. The second factor is good management. KIP was managed under a special, multidisciplinary unit, i.e. the KIP Unit, containing motivated experts from a wide range of skills needed in slum upgrading. This was as a response from the Governor when he realised that the original structure could not work optimally. Officials who worked in the unit were much better paid than the usual public officials as a consequence of the more intensive 4 work load. The “gotong royong” culture and the leadership structure of the community, which is extended to as low as neighbourhood level (Rukun Tetangga), have contributed to the good management. The third factor is financial and management support from the World Bank, which started after the first five years of KIP. Banes highlights that the Bank’s support has been able to scale up the slum upgrading (Chavez et al., 2000). KIP then became nationwide program in big cities of Indonesia, like in

4

Gotong royong literally means work together voluntarily. This is the behavior of Indonesian people since a long time ago.

Informal Settlements and Affordable Housing 2009

IV - 23

Bandung, Surabaya, Semarang, etc. with shared funding from local, national governments and the World Bank. Challenges are there, however. First, it is hard to replicate the success of KIP in other developing countries. An important factor for the difficulty is the different cultural and political structures. Many national governments are reluctant to upgrade slums because it is like forcing them to legalise the dwellers’ illegal land, although as known, it was not the case in Indonesian KIPs (Chavez et al., 2000). For those with such kind of reluctance, recent proposed strategies by the UN-Habitat (2004), one of which is to integrate slums into the urban development plan, may fix the problem. Indonesian experience is on the contrary. When people saw that the government was improving the facilities and services without forcing them to leave, they became eager to fix their land tenure problem. Second, KIP is later on found to be unsustainable. The maintenance has not worked as expected. Problems, like solid waste filling the drainage channels, the clogging of drainage ditches, and the cracking of roads, appeared not long after the improvement finished (Chavez et al., 2000). Apparently, the cause is that the Local Government of Jakarta, who is responsible for the maintenance, does not have enough fund to keep the improved infrastructure and facilities in their proper condition. The similar situations happen in other big cities of Indonesia. In short, financing is among the keys to sustain slum upgrading. This may however be the most important one in Indonesia. 1.3 The Objective, the Method and the Organisation The paper seeks a theoretical foundation of utilising sustainability reinvestment scheme, a somewhat forgotten function in Indonesia, to help financing slum upgrading. Sustainability reinvestment is among the methods of ensuring intra- and inter-generational equity in development, in which a significant portion of development benefits is reinvested for sustaining development. Literature study is the method of this essay, through which opportunities to integrate sustainability reinvestment into the Indonesian taxation system are searched. The main results are principles and steps that are needed for tax policy reformulation, the implementation of which can help ensuring the sustainability of slum upgrading in Indonesia. This paper comprises four sections. This introduction is followed by a discussion on equity, sustainability reinvestment and slums. The discussion will show that to sustain development, ensuring intra- and inter-generational equity is needed, and sustainability reinvestment plays an important role on that. It will also be identified that inequities will not only threaten the environment, but also create slums.

IV - 24

Sustainable Slum Upgrading In Urban Area

Section three discusses opportunities to increase the tax capability in funding slum upgrading, especially through expanding the use of sustainability reinvestment. Afterwards, the last section concludes. 2. EQUITY, SUSTAINABILITY REINVESTMENT AND SLUMS Improving the quality of life of slum dwellers can only be sustained in the framework of sustainable development. This awareness is encouraged by the UN when defining the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), among which is the target “to have achieved a significant improvement in the lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers by 2020” (UN, 2008: 43). Meanwhile, sustainable development is defined as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (WCED, 1987: 43). Intra- and intergenerational equity is thus essential to be ensured. The application of intragenerational equity is needed to be able to meet the present generation’s needs, while inter-generational equity is to ensure the same or better opportunities for future generations to meet their own needs. It is thus important to discuss how development can ensure the application of equity. This is done in the first subsection, with special emphasis on the role of sustainability reinvestment. The second subsection then discusses how equity failures share to slum problems. 2.1 Equity and Sustainability Reinvestment The importance of equity application and sustainability reinvestment is obvious when considering sustainable development framework as seen in Figure 38.1. The model is based on natural resource dominant economy like in Indonesia (Sugiri, 2005). The model explains how the three types of capital, i.e. natural capital (Kn), physical or human-made capital (Kp), and human capital (Kh) work together to generate welfare sustainably. The development process comprises four functions where equity should be applied. Therefore, defining equity is important. Equity, as far as development is concerned, can be defined as fairness in the process of development and justice in distributing the outcome (Rawls, 1971). There is no dispute about this, since it can be seen that, in the development process, every actor has its own, specific function determined by its own potential and effort, and mechanisms in the socio-economic system of the community. The development mechanism is a socio-economic system, within which the process of accruing benefits, distributing them to the stakeholders, and efforts to sustain the system are involved. Every

Informal Settlements and Affordable Housing 2009

IV - 25

person has his/her potential and limitations to function in the system, which can be perceived as unique if one looks into the details.

Figure 1. A Simple Model of Equity Based Development (Sugiri, 2005)

Notes: I : Equity I II : Equity II III : Equity III IV : Equity IV All arrows represent positive flows, except the ‘x’ arrow which is negative externality, i.e. the negative impact of the production function to the nonproduction function, however, it is hardly captured by the market mechanism (the market failure). In terms of these specific functions of the people, inequality exists. This meaning can better be understood if, as suggested by Sen (1992), human diversity and the range of focuses are considered when examining equality. Inequality, which exists because of the differences in natural human characteristics such as “age, sex, proneness to illness” or “inherited fortunes” (Sen 1992:1), without any injustice in socio-economic relationships, may not be a problem. Meanwhile, pursuing equality of a variable may cause inequality in another related variable. This conveys a message that it is important to assess equity in any analysis of inequality, because inequality that occurs without any unfairness may not need attention. Fairness is incorporated when all development actors share the same opportunity of accomplishing their specific functions. It is the initial opportunity to complete their specific jobs that is to be distributed equally,

Sustainable Slum Upgrading In Urban Area

IV - 26

but not their functions, nor their achievements are to be equalised. If their opportunity is not made equal, then the development itself would not be fair or optimal. When equity is properly applied, everyone is not necessarily equal, but everything is put in its proper place. It is like the allocation of components that make a personal computer work. One cannot put the processor into the RAM (random access memory) slot and vice versa. Thus, personal income, for example, may not be equally distributed, but, no one would complain about another person’s higher income. This is because people do not feel any injustice in the inequality. Therefore, justice in the distribution of development benefits would mean that certain kinds of basic benefit should be distributed equally, especially with regard to fundamental human needs. World Bank (2005) asserts that poor people stay in poverty because of inadequate access to schools, health centres, roads, market opportunities, credit, effective riskmanagement mechanisms and other empowering services, to indicate that certain aspects of benefit need to be distributed equally. On the other hand, other kinds of benefit can be distributed unequally, depending on the extent of importance of the recipients’ performances in the development. The first function in the development process is the distribution of development benefits to the people. Intra-generational equity should be applied in this function (equity I), the failure of which would end up to poverty and deep inequality, because: • •

First, the majority of people would be deprived in terms of low welfare level despite their hard work (equity failure Ia), and Second, unfair access to public infrastructure, facilities and services could occur (equity failure Ib).

The second one is the production function. Failure to guarantee intraand inter-generational equity (equity II) in this function would also cause deep inequality and unsustainability. • • • •

First, it is because fairness is not properly applied in the access to natural resources as a production factor (equity failure IIa). Second, unfair competition in the economy could occur that would make a few stakeholders better off at the expense of the majority (equity failure IIb). Third, natural resources may be so exploited that threaten their sustainability of use (equity failure IIc). Fourth, negative externalities of economic activities could create serious threat to the environment (equity failure IId).

The third function is the non-production function, a function of the natural environment that cannot be substituted by the physical capital. Failure to apply inter-generational equity (equity III) in this function would cause unsustainability. Equity in this function means that a certain amount of natural capital should be kept constant, or otherwise the assimilative and carrying capacity of the environment would be damaged (equity failure III).

Informal Settlements and Affordable Housing 2009

IV - 27

Sustainability reinvestment is the fourth function. Failure to apply equity (equity IV) in this function would cause unsustainability, because: • •

First, many people would bear negative externality costs with no or inappropriate compensation (equity failure IVa). Second, insignificant sustainability reinvestment would be insufficient to maintain the ecosystem (equity failure IVb).

The model shows that sustainability reinvestment is mainly intended to keep overall capital stock in its constant functionality. By utilising sustainability reinvestment, the environment can be kept functioning well to support life, renewable resources can be appropriately renewed, while exhaustible ones can be substituted properly by either physical capital or other natural resources or both. Also, the function of human capital can be kept stable or even increased. This makes it possible to enhance the applicability of sustainability reinvestment to help financing slum upgrading, which will be discussed in the next section. Meanwhile, the next subsection discusses the relationships between equity failures and slums. 2.2 Inequity and Slums Among the nine equity failures discussed previously, those related to benefit distribution and sustainability reinvestment are the most relevant with slum problems. It is easy, for example, to find that many slum dwellers are actually hard workers, but they earn so little money that is not enough to alleviate them from poverty (related to inequity Ia). Also, it is common that hardly can slum dwellers get basic infrastructure and facilities properly (equity failure Ib). UN-Habitat (2006) recognises that apparent dualism exists in cities of developing countries, where on one side the inhabitants have all the urban benefits, while on the other side, the urban poor live in even worse situation than their rural relatives. With regard to sustainability reinvestment, which is needed as a function to mainly correct the inequities, slums are usually neglected from any compensation by, for instance, a nearby pollutive industry (inequity IVa). Even worse is that sustainability reinvestment has never been a focus in Indonesian development (inequity IVb). That is why slum dwellers would be the most vulnerable to urban environmental degradation. Other equity failures may also be related to slums, although may not be so close as the above four failures. This can be inferred from the expected results of slum upgrading, one of which is to increase slum dwellers’ economic opportunity, as discussed previously. This is related to solving the problem of unfair competition (inequity IIb). UN-Habitat (2006) has also noted that job applicants from slum dwellers are less likely to be called for interviews than those from better-off neighborhoods. Having understood that slum dwellers are most likely victims of equity failures, it is fair to say that those responsible for the inequities should

IV - 28

Sustainable Slum Upgrading In Urban Area

contribute in financing slum upgrading equitably. This can be facilitated through expanding the use of sustainability reinvestment, accommodated in the taxation system. 3. EXPANDING THE USE OF SUSTAINABILITY REINVESTMENT: TOWARDS TAX POLICY REFORMULATION Tax is a transfer of money from individuals and private sector to the public sector under conditions stated in the tax regulation, without the payers receiving direct benefit of equal value (Mangoting, 2001). The returned benefit for the tax payers is mainly the accomplishment of the country’s social and economic objectives. So, as far as the people is concerned, there are at least two main objectives of taxation (Cobham, 2007). The first is for redistribution purposes. A country like Indonesia would guarantee its people to get their fundamental needs, and assure them fair access to get more wealth, which would depend on individual capability and effort. This would make Indonesia embrace the principle of equity discussed previously, i.e. fairness in the development process and justice in the distribution of benefit. To be able to do this, redistribution is a must, and taxation is very useful for this purpose. The second one is for country’s revenue, which is needed to finance governmental expenditure in accomplishing the country’s objectives. Expenses like routine official payroll, maintenance and operational cost of governmental facilities, and expenditure to facilitate development, are financed by government revenues, an important source of which is tax. Therefore, with such kind of importance, the Indonesian taxation can be reformulated to help financing slum upgrading. This section proposes principles and steps needed for tax policy reformulation, which is based on the idea of revitalising and expanding the use of sustainability reinvestment. 3.1 The Principles Expanding the use of sustainability reinvestment to help financing slum upgrading should be in accordance with certain principles. First, market based instrument (MBI) should be utilised in this case. This is because taxation itself can work properly if it is integrated within the market mechanism (see the re-pricing objective of taxation in e.g. Cobham, 2007). Second, the tax payers should be well identified. This is a common principle of taxation, that is to maintain fairness in the tax collection. For the specific purpose of helping to finance slum upgrading, the tax payers should be those who are better off because of inequities Ia, Ib, IIb, IVa and IVb as previously discussed.

Informal Settlements and Affordable Housing 2009

IV - 29

Third, a specific pool of tax collection for sustainability reinvestment should be created in the taxation system. This is the pool for taxes accrued from those benefitting from equity failures in the production and nonproduction functions, as well as in the benefit distribution (see Figure 38.1). Fourth, an equitable arrangement should be made in distributing tax yield for the many purposes of the government. This is needed to avoid externalities that can reduce the effectiveness of taxation policy because, as known, “optimal policy involves correcting externalities” (Kopczuk, 2009: 3). A portion of the sustainability reinvestment pool can be used to help financing slum upgrading. Careful calculation can be made based on the extent of the three equity failures (Ia, Ib, and IIb) most related to slum problems. 3.2 The Reformulation The existing framework of Indonesian taxation is somewhat complicated, although it is much better than before the amendments of the taxation laws (Brondolo et al., 2008). It is constructed by so many regulations, like Act No. 6/1983, amended by Act No. 16/2000 regarding the General Rules of Taxation, Act No. 7/1983, amended by Act No. 17/2000 concerning the Income Tax, Act No. 8/1983, amended by Act No. 18/2000 regarding the Value Added Tax, and more than five other acts and their amendments, and many other lower level, provincial and local regulations. However, sustainability reinvestment has never become the focus. There are no environmental related taxes, nor taxes meant for correcting market failures or driving corporations to internalise the negative externality. This may be because in dealing with unsustainability problems, instead of MBI, command and control (CAC) has been the sole approach for a long time. Environmental regulations, like the pollution control for industries and other polluting activities, and standard ambient air quality, are determined and enforced on obey or shut down basis. When a polluting industry, for example, exceeds its maximum quantity of pollutants, warning is issued. After several warnings without compliance, the industry may have to be shut down. With CAC approach, it is difficult to correct market failures characterising most environmental problems, which should be integrated in the taxation system (more on market failures and MBIs, see e.g. Tietenberg, 1996; O’Connor, 1994). Closing down polluting businesses is not the proper solution because it would impede the economic growth. On the other hand, corporate social responsibility (CSR) which has been popular recently, is often considered enough to solve social inequality problems. There is no hesitation that CSR is a good initiative from private sector, however, it is first of all just like a charity. The portion of private benefit spent on CSR is not regulated. Moreover, CSR is only useful for the

IV - 30

Sustainable Slum Upgrading In Urban Area

surrounding community of a private business, while what is needed is to remedy the inequities which is nationwide or even global. Recent effort has however been made by the Indonesian Government through proposing an act applying some kind of pollution tax in sub-national and local taxation. This is a significant initial effort to implement MBIs by applying the polluters pay principle. However, the Indonesian Parliament refused the proposal, uttering that the proposed law is just like allowing industries to pollute (Kompas, 2008). This is an obvious misunderstanding, however, it is widespread in the Indonesian decision makers. The problem of policy making, not only in developing countries, but also in developed ones, is that policies are formulated by a governing body, not by a prominent planner (Battaglini and Coate, 2006). Therefore, the reformulation should start with a national awakening on the importance of sustainability reinvestment. This can be done through various means of dissemination, like conferences involving public, private and community representatives, and also public commercials on media. The initiation should be encouraged by academics and researchers by conducting relevant studies supporting the need to utilise sustainability reinvestment, and publishing the results. The next step is for the government to propose enrichment in the existing taxation system. Pollution tax, for example, can be re-proposed to get approval from the parliament, which at this stage is well-informed about the significant of sustainability reinvestment. However, the law proposal should be enhanced to not only deal with controlling pollution, but also the need of taxation for sustainability reinvestment as a whole. 4. CONCLUSION It has been shown in this paper that sustainability reinvestment, which is usually applied for restoring environmental damage caused by the development activities based, among others, on polluters pay principle, can be extended to also help financing slum upgrading. This is because hardly are people living in slums out of their freewill. So, equity failures in development process could contribute in creating slum problems. Slum inhabitants are most probably deprived from their rights to get equitable benefits from development, and sustainability reinvestment can help fixing the problems of inequity. By this, slum upgrading becomes an integrated part in ensuring sustainable development. It has also been discussed that among the policy implications is tax policy reformulation. However, enrichment should be made in the Indonesian taxation system to accommodate sustainability reinvestment. A new post in the tax yield, namely sustainability reinvestment pool, can be created. Equitable compensation for slum dwellers should be available from this post, and this would help financing slum upgrading.

Informal Settlements and Affordable Housing 2009

IV - 31

5. REFERENCES Battaglini, M. and Coate, S., 2006, A Dynamic Theory of Public Spending, Taxation and Debt, A Seminar Paper, [Online], Available: http://www.econ.wisc.edu/~scholz/Seminar/barro25.pdf [March 8, 2009]. Brondolo, J., Silvani, C., Le Borgne, E., and Bosch, F., 2008, Tax Administration Reform and Fiscal Adjustment: The Case of Indonesia (2001-07). IMF Working Paper, WP/08/129, May. Chavez, R., Gattoni, G. and Zipperer M., 2000, Indonesia, The Kampung Improvement Program (KIP): Successful Upgrading with Local Commitment, an interview with Chris Banes, Municipal Engineer at the World Bank, [Online], Available: http://www.worldbank.org/urban/upgrading/kampung.html [January 27, 2009]. CHF (Cooperative Housing Foundation) International, 2008, Terms of Engagement: Private Sector Initiatives to Unlock the Economic Potential of Urban Slums, Proceedings of the CHF International Urban Colloquium, (Bangalore: CHF International). Cobham, A., 2007, The tax consensus has failed: Recommendation to policy makers and donors, researchers and civil society. OCGG (the Oxford Council on Good Governance) Economy Recommendation, 8, January, [Online], Available: http://ocgg.org/fileadmin/Publications/ER008.pdf [March 8, 2009]. Dasgupta, B. and Lall, S.V., 2006, Assessing Benefits of Slum Upgrading Programs in Second-best Setting. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper, 3993, August. Hartiningsih, M., 2005, Dr Anna KT: Jangan Pesimistis Terus-menerus (Dr Anna KT: Do not be Always Pessimistic), an interview, Kompas, October 5, [Online], Available: http://www.unhabitat.org/cli-10.pdf [February 24, 2009]. Kompas, 2008, Usulan Pajak Lingkungan Terancam Dibatalkan (Environmental Tax Proposal to be Cancelled), September 9, [Online], Available:http://entertainment.kompas.com/read/xml/2008/09/09/00481256/ usulan.pajak.lingkungan.terancam.dibatalkan [March 8, 2009]. Kompas, 2000, Jejak Bang Ali di Kota Metropolitan (Bang Ali’s Footprint in the Metropolitan City), [Online], Available: http://www.kompas.com/read/xml/2008/05/21/06203186/jejak.bang.ali.di.ko ta.metropolitan [January 27, 2009]. Kopczuk, W., 2009, Economics of estate taxation: Review of theory and evidence, A Seminar Paper, the NYU Tax Law Review symposium, February 6. Mangoting, Y., 2001, Pajak Penghasilan dalam Sebuah Kebijaksanaan (Income Tax in the Policy). Jurnal Akuntansi & Keuangan, 3 (2), 142-156. O’Connor, D., 1994, Managing the Environment with Rapid Industrialisation: Lessons from the East Asian Experience, (Paris: OECD). Painter, D.L., Sole, R.C., and Moser, L., 2006, Scaling Up Slum Improvement: Engaging Slum Dwellers and the Private Sector to Finance a Better Future, World Urban Forum III, June 19-26, (Washington: TCGI).

IV - 32

Sustainable Slum Upgrading In Urban Area

Serageldin, M., Driscoll, J. and Solloso, E., 2003. Partnerships and Targeted Programs to Improve the Lives of Slum Dwellers, A Paper, UNCHS-Habitat International Conference on Sustainable Urbanization Strategies, Weihai, China, November 3-5. Servants (to Asia’s Urban Poor) 2009, UN report: One third in cities of developing countries lives in slum, [Online], Available: http://www.servantsasia.org/index.php/news/8-general/366-un-report-onethird-in-cities-of-developing-countries-lives-in-slum.html [January 23, 2009]. Sugiri, A. 2005, Redressing Equity Issues Within Natural Resource-Rich Regions Through Sustainable Regional Development: Globalisation and Decentralisation in East Kalimantan, Indonesia, A Design Statement, the School Seminar, School of Geography, Planning and Architecture, University of Queensland, Australia, August 27. Tietenberg, T., 1996, Environmental and Natural Resource Economics, fourth edition, (New York: Harper Collins). UN, 2008, The Millennium Development Goals Report 2008, (New York: the UN). UN-Habitat, 2006, The State of the World’s Cities Report 2006/7, (Nairobi: the UN-Habitat). UN-Habitat, 2004, Pro Poor Land Management: Integrating slums into city planning, (Nairobi: the UN-Habitat). WALHI (Wahana Lingkungan Hidup Indonesia/Friends of the Earth Indonesia), 2004, Komite Masyarakat Makasar Anti Penindasan (KMMAP) Menolak Segala Program Bank Dunia (Makasar People’s Committee on Anti Deprivation (KMMAP) Refuses All World Bank Programs), [Online], Available: http://www.walhi.or.id/kampanye/globalisasi/040906_demodprd.html [February 24, 2009]. WCED, 1987, Our Common Future, (Oxford: Oxford University Press). World Bank, 2005, World Development Report 2006: Equity and Development, (Washington: The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank). World Bank, 2000, Cities Without Slums: Moving Slum Upgrading to Scale. Urban Notes: Thematic Group on Services to The Urban Poor, 2, May, 1-3.