Categories
KLIK DI SINI untuk membaca artikel dalam Bahasa Indonesia.
Hendricus Andy Simarmata, the Chairman of the Indonesian Association of Regional and Urban Planners (IAP), observes that there has long been a dichotomy between environmental and economic activities. Environmental recovery is often seen as a financial burden, partly because many urban policies and interventions tend to be reactive—addressing problems only after they arise, which ultimately requires significant costs. However, with more strategic, data-driven anticipatory and transformative efforts, environmental recovery can become an economic investment. Tangible evidence of successful environmental recovery initiatives can help shift this reactive mindset.
“Environmental considerations should no longer be an afterthought in urban and regional planning but rather the very foundation of the planning process,” said Hendricus Andy Simarmata, a seasoned urban planner and academic who has dedicated the past 20 years to urban planning and environmental management at both national and international levels.
Simarmata’s conviction regarding the importance of environmental aspects in urban planning was shaped early in his career. Witnessing numerous environmental issues in Indonesian cities, he pursued a postgraduate degree specializing in urban development. “My passion for environmental issues grew stronger while writing my thesis on community adaptation to coal dust pollution in Banjarmasin,” Simarmata recalled.
His 2006 thesis found a positive correlation between coal dust pollution and various health problems experienced by residents living near stockpile locations. This research reinforced his belief that a well-maintained environment leads to better public health and that spatial planning plays a crucial role in achieving this.
Nearly two decades later, in his various roles as an urban planner, advisor, founder of a urban planning consulting firm, academic, and advocate, Simarmata—who has served as Chairman of the Indonesian Association of Regional and Urban Planners (IAP) Indonesia since 2019—continues to champion the integration of environment aspects into urban planning. He advocates for placing environmental concerns at the forefront, even before social and economic factors.
Based on his observations, environmental issues are still not a central focus in Indonesia’s urban spatial planning practices. This neglect not only leads to long-term environmental problems but also results in substantial economic losses.
Shifting from reactive to anticipatory approaches
According to Simarmata, many urban policies and interventions are reactive, addressing issues only after they cause harm. One clear example is how environmental pollution is often tackled only after it significantly impacts public health.
“People tend to ignore hazardous waste issues. They only start caring once someone suffers from lead poisoning, for instance. But instead of being reactive, we must be anticipatory,” Simarmata stated.
He believes that strategic, data-driven planning can prevent many environmental problems early on. For example, anticipating the growth of the electric vehicle (EV) industry requires estimating the number of used batteries expected in the next five years. “These projections will help us develop a strategic paper on waste management,” he explained.
Furthermore, Simarmata emphasized that implementing anticipatory environmental safeguards can prevent economic losses caused by pollution. “Economic activities without proper environmental safeguards can lead to financial losses even greater than the initial investment itself.”
Simarmata cited his experience in a feasibility study and post-recovery development plan for Pesarean Village in Tegal Regency, Central Java. For decades, household-scale aluminum smelting and used lead-acid battery recycling had been the primary sources of income in Pesarean. While boosting the local economy, these activities—conducted without proper safety and health standards—resulted in large-scale hazardous waste contamination, particularly lead pollution. The environmental recovery efforts required substantial financial resources, in addition to the health costs borne by the affected community.
Transformative approaches to environmental recovery
Reactive patterns, Simarmata noted, also persist in environmental recovery efforts. Many pollution mitigation strategies focus only on short-term solutions. For instance, weather modification is often used to address air pollution—an expensive method that fails to provide a sustainable solution.
Instead of reactive interventions, Simarmata stressed the need to reframe existing challenges to develop long-term, transformative solutions. These transformative efforts require collaboration among various stakeholders. In the case of Pesarean, environmental recovery efforts did not stop at relocation and remediation. A post-recovery plan was developed to transform Pesarean into a tourism village by leveraging its cultural heritage, specifically the tomb of Amangkurat I. Several government agencies collaborated to create new public spaces around the site, ensuring that visitors would not only come for pilgrimage but also for tourism activities that could boost the local economy.
“We need to find ways to create added value for these areas so that environmental recovery, land rehabilitation, and ecosystem restoration become economic investments rather than costs,” Simarmata explained.
The biggest challenge, he admitted, is changing the mindset. “To shift this perspective, we need evidence. We must present concrete proof that community well-being significantly improves when the environment is restored and maintained.”
Simarmata believes that data—such as statistics on rising local incomes—will be a powerful tool in convincing both communities and stakeholders that environmental recovery is an investment. “We need to showcase successful initiatives to communicate this idea effectively.”
Also read: Breaking the Cycle of Extreme Lead Poisoning in Pesarean, Indonesia
Three key factors for transformative change
Simarmata emphasized that the government plays a critical role in driving transformative environmental recovery initiatives. He outlined three key factors necessary to achieve this mission.
The first is to develop economically feasible environmental recovery models through shared responsibility mechanisms. The government must involve industry players and business owners in the recovery process, as they are also accountable for environmental damage. Hence, establishing clear economic models is essential.
“If we frame this issue solely as an environmental problem, industries will assume it is only the government’s and activists’ responsibility,” Simarmata explained. The government can use regional budget allocations (APBD) as seed funding to encourage business owners, landowners, and local communities to participate.
The second is to advance local environmental management technologies. Relying on foreign technologies can be costly, so developing local solutions is crucial. “We need to build research and development (R&D) programs by involving local universities, especially those specializing in environmental studies,” Simarmata suggested.
The third is to enact supportive regulations and policies. If new industries emerge that are not yet covered by existing hazardous waste regulations, new policies must be introduced promptly. “There must be regulatory oversight. Governance is key. We must stay ahead of the market rather than lagging behind. Regulations should be adjusted to respond to market dynamics, ensuring they function optimally.”
Building sustainable cities
According to Simarmata, the government must remain sensitive to urban dynamics and intervene accordingly. “Cities are constantly evolving. Spatial planning must accommodate these changes to ensure sustainability, even when land use shifts.”
A truly sustainable city, he explained, maintains a balance between economic productivity and competitiveness and environmental preservation while ensuring that no communities are marginalized. Humanizing the city, developing the city’s ability to adapt to economic changes, and ensuring the sustainability of environmental processes and functions are the keys to a sustainable city.
Changes are inevitable, but with anticipatory strategies—such as accounting for population growth, climate change, technological advancements, and new industries—combined with transformative environmental recovery efforts, we can build sustainable cities that thrive for generations to come.
