Sustainable development study of the post-disaster housing resettlement case in Yogyakarta Province, Indonesia case study: Nglepen Village and Pagerjurang Village

According to Government Regulation No. 21 of 2008, chapter 67, article 3, the Government of Indonesia promotes community involvement in the post-disaster housing recovery act. The resettlement case in Nglepen Village and Pagerjurang Village is categorized as a rapid and massive recovery based on a contractor-based strategy due to limited land availability, budgetary constraints, post-disaster emergency conditions, and the government’s responsibility to provide large numbers of sufficient housing units. In specific circumstances, the condition of the relocation houses will typically not be able to meet the needs of most residents. This study emphasized the sustainable development of the two case studies and highlighted different private residential housing types: 1) a dome-shaped reinforced structure house in Nglepen and 2) a conventional reinforced concrete structural frame house in Pagerjurang. The two different structural housing system types will affect the sustainable development of the housing condition. Field surveys and interviews were conducted in 2022–2023 to collect the primary data, and study of literacy was used to support the findings and analyzed through a descriptive qualitative method. The sustainable development in the case study relocation area is mainly influenced by aspects such as the economic sector, development priorities related to the residents’ activities and needs, and the adaptive design strategy between old and new buildings. According to the disaster management law and derivative regulations, the Government of Indonesia has sought ideal conditions for disaster-affected residents in the relocation and reconstruction processes. The study’s conclusions suggested that the government, beneficiaries, and all stakeholders must collaborate to improve post-disaster housing and settlement relocation planning and reconstruction in the future by involving the residents in the process of deciding on the location, managing the development, and creating comprehensively sustainable development guidelines for the people’s houses and its living environment.


Disaster management system in Indonesia
The Aceh and Nias earthquakes and tsunami and the Yogyakarta earthquake were among the several significant disasters that struck Indonesia between 2004 and 2006 and resulted in substantial damage and a high death toll.As a result, the government of Indonesia began to re-evaluate the nation's disaster management regulations and procedures [1].To continue and improve the disaster victims' livelihood, multi-collaboration works between the government, implementer stakeholders, and the beneficiaries are crucial in the pre-and post-disaster management systems.The Government of Indonesia issued Disaster Management Law (DML) no.24/2007 as the mandatory pre-and post-disaster management system law.It included particular derivative regulations or policies that might be further adjusted in response to the disaster conditions [2].
The National Disaster Management Agency/NDMA (Badan Nasional Penanggulanagan Bencana/BNPB) was established following the DML no.24/2007 issuance.Under the direct supervision of the President of the Republic of Indonesia, the NDMA/BNPB is a government disaster management agency that does not constitute part of the governance cabinet.
The Indonesian government's main priorities before DML no.24/2007 were emergency evacuation, relief, and post-disaster recovery efforts.The policy development on Indonesia's DML no.24/2007 was initiated based on the catastrophic impacts of the 2004 Aceh tsunami and the 2006 Yogyakarta earthquake, as well as the consideration of the Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015 [3].
Indonesia's DML no.24/2007 managed the comprehensive disaster management system that covered pre-disaster risk and mitigation planning, post-disaster recovery actions, and opportunities for sustainable development.
Government regulations no.21, 22, and 23 of 2008 as derivative rules from the DML no.24/2007.Government regulations no.21/2008 consists of the post-disaster housing reconstruction policies and strategies.Government regulations no.22/2008 consists of funding management provided by the government through a subsidiary allocation and distribution scheme.Government funding is allocated as a stimulus budget for the disaster victims to continue and restart their new livelihood.Government no.23/2008 consists of terms and guidelines for the stakeholders involved in the post-disaster recovery rehabilitation and reconstruction.Depending on the region, disaster types, disaster damages, and recovery plans, additional derivative rules and regulations may be provided to support the technical implementation in the field [5][6] [7].

Post-disaster housing reconstruction policy
Two policy implementation strategies related to post-disaster housing reconstruction are the top-down policy with a "contractor-based" approach and the bottom-up policy with a "community-based" approach.Implementing the post-disaster housing reconstruction policy is essential, as it will significantly affect achieving the intended results and the development of sustainable livelihoods for the victims who will receive assistance.
According to Government Regulation No. 21/2008, Chapter 67, Article 3, the post-disaster housing reconstruction effort initiated by the Government of Indonesia promotes community involvement in the post-disaster housing rehabilitation and reconstruction strategy.The post-disaster housing reconstruction implementation policy depends on the situation of the impacted disaster area.
Rebuild in situ and reconstructing the previous houses/buildings in the land area considered safe by the government is mainly implemented in post-earthquake conditions.Relocate housing and settlement or resettlement of the affected area for those impacted by disasters who have lost their residence, assets, or land, and building new housing in a new, safer place is usually implemented in the tsunami, landslide, liquefaction, and volcano eruption cases [2].
Based on Government Regulation no.21/2008 Chapter 86, the residential housing and settlement relocations are recommended to be managed by a contractor-based approach due to the disaster impact scale on the affected area and considering the future disaster risk and hazard.The government's responsibility to provide large numbers of sufficient safe houses and settlements will be needed to assess the limited land availability, budget constraints, and post-disaster emergency conditions.By considering the situation, a resettlement project might not be able to meet the needs of most of the residents.

.3. The 2006 Yogyakarta landslide case at Nglepen Village and the 2010 Mount Merapi volcano
eruption at Pagerjurang Village This article will emphasize Yogyakarta's post-disaster residential houses resettlement project through a top-down contractor-based reconstruction strategy.The two case studies selected for this study are the Nglepen Village resettlement project, which features the installation of a reinforced concrete domeshaped housing structure, and the Pagerjurang Village, which features a standard reinforced concrete structural column and beams filled with masonry brick wall [8].
Nglepen Village is located in Sengir Hamlet, Sumberharjo Village, Prambanan District, Sleman Regency, Yogyakarta Province.Nglepen Village is included in Yogyakarta's 2006 post-earthquake housing and settlement rehabilitation and reconstruction project.International NGOs funded this project through the "Dome For The World" Program.The post-disaster residential housing and resettlement project in Nglepen Village was built in a "dome" house form.The dome-house form was a new imported "culture" for the community of Nglepen Village.It was found that the existence of dome houses at Nglepen Village showed that this type of dwelling could only implement external developments and technical adjustments in a limited method.Considering that the dome-shaped structure houses needed to be adjusted, Pingkan et al stated that, particularly for post-disaster housing construction, the design of this house itself was still far from being in harmony with the idea of adaptable and sustainable housing.According to a study by Tucker et al. (2012), design solutions could be generated by studying traditional dwelling types and settlement patterns and applying appropriate materials and technology to suit the climate, site, and social factors [9].
The second case study, Pagerjurang Village, is selected because this village has the most significant number of households resettled from five hamlets, with 301 families affected by the 2010 Mount Merapi The Pagerjurang residential housing resettlement project differs significantly from the Nglepen Village dome houses development, consisting of regular common-type houses measuring 6 by 6 meters.As part of the inexpensive housing provision program, this house type is a "core house" type that has been utilized in Indonesia for decades, according to Mally et al. ( 2012) [12].Ikaputra (2008) stated that customizing the core house illustrates how any model and standard design could be modified in various ways to fit every family's unique context.The developed core house can be expanded by repeating a structural frame that is modular and directed by the design to accommodate the development [13].In the Pagerjurang post-reconstructed housing evaluation, Wulansari (2014) and Setiadi et al. ( 2020) studied the interrelation aspects of old and new spaces, the role of government in resettlement efforts and inhabitants' involvement through the social, economic and culture sectors [11] [14].
Designing post-disaster housing typically prioritizes features like construction strength, massproduction speed, and other functional features.As a result, it is essential to remember that the house should consider the local culture, the distinctive characteristics of each resident, and their particular needs.The current condition of the post-disaster residential houses in Nglepen Village and Pagerjurang Village are mainly used as the residents' primary houses.Some units had been used for other functions, such as secondary houses, or reformed as guest houses for tourists in the Nglepen Village case.In the case study, the residential housing resettlement project was mainly carried out through a contractorbased approach, in which inhabitants' involvement was less.This study will analyze and discuss these questions: 1) What kind of sustainable development in adaptations and transformations have been made to the residential houses in the case study recently, and how did the inhabitants implement their sustainable development to their houses?2) What factors have affected sustainable development?and 3) Which sectors might the government and stakeholders improve for sustainable development in future post-disaster housing resettlement projects?

Purpose of the study and method
To determine the key factors that affected the community's sustainable development in this study, comparing the residential housing unit characteristics at Nglepen Village and Pagerjurang Village became the study's emphasis.Even though these two case studies had distinctive characteristics of the house-reconstruction approaches, this study will clarify the factors that influenced the sustainable developments between those two villages.
The study highlighted different house types: a dome-shaped reinforced-concrete structure house at Nglepen Village and a conventional reinforced concrete structural frame house at Pagerjurang Village.The different structural housing system types will influence the sustainable development aspects of the housing condition.The government and all the stakeholders can use the lessons learned from this study for other resettlement projects in different case studies that might have been implemented in the same context as the Nglepen or Pagerjurang case.
The authors used a field survey, observation, and interview with the community and local government staff conducted between 2022-2023 to collect data and literacy studies to support the findings and analyze the findings through a descriptive qualitative approach to summarize the results.Yin (2003) states that analyzing several case studies involves comparing various case studies to find cases of "pattern matching" between sustainable development and housing modification.The identified development applied to the case study will be used as the pattern's orientation and analyzed to conclude the research's objectives [15].
This article is structured into 5 sections.The first section is about the background of the study and consists of Indonesia's post-disaster management policy and its correlation to the study topic of Yogyakarta's post-disaster housing resettlement project, followed by the case study description, review of previous studies, and research question.The second section is about the purpose and method used in this study.The third section will describe the findings of the case study; in this section, each case study will describe the resettlement project implementation scheme from the funding, reconstruction method, and current situation with the transformation identified.The findings and analysis will lead to the discussion in section four and summarized to answer the research question in section five.The Nglepen Village dome houses were funded by the World Association of Non-Governmental Organizations (WANGO) and Domes for The World Foundation (DFTW).These NGOs provided 71 dome house units and nine public facilities, including communal bathrooms, toilets, a mosque, and a clinic.These buildings were built on 3.5 hectares of land owned by the village government after the agreement between the government, NGOs, and the community that will stay in the dome houses.
The dome house unit is a reinforced concrete dome-shaped construction with circular dimensions with a diameter of 7 meters and an area of 38 m2.It has two floors: 1 st floor area is for the living room, bedroom, family room, and kitchen; the 2 nd floor is mainly used as storage.The buildings started to be constructed on October 10 th , 2006, and have been occupied since April 2007 [20].The newly adapted cultures can be seen from their "compact" dome house and the new limited settlement area compared to their old land and home.
According to the interview, it took much work for them to adapt, especially to the very narrow and uncomfortable spaces in accommodating the activity needs of those who previously mainly worked as agricultural laborers.When the inhabitants initiated to expand their houses to make additional space/rooms, the dome-shaped house was difficult to extend with the new conventional reinforced concrete structure.
The unique design of the Nglepen dome houses attracted many people to visit Nglepen Village to see and experience living inside a dome house and its environment.The high number of people visiting Nglepen Village has changed the situation and conditions of the village, which previously earned income from the agricultural sector to the tourism, formal and informal sector.This social transformation phenomenon also affected the state of the dome house units in the Nglepen Village.
Due to the transformation from the inhabitant's primary job occupancies, they can develop their dome house with additional space or buildings constructed with reinforced concrete structural columns and beams filled with masonry brick walls (figure 7).
The building transformation identified in the survey in September 2022 and March 2023 is as follows: 1) additional bedrooms, 2) new construction of private bathroom and toilet, 3) living and family room, 4) car and motorbike garage space, 5) commercial/workspace and 6) additional warehouse/storage space.
Regarding the development of the private bathrooms and toilets in every dome house unit in Nglepen Village, the communal public bathrooms and toilets in the cluster center in every block are now abandoned, and most are in damaged condition.According to Table 1, 54 units (76.5%) are still occupied, 2 units (3%) are rented, 4 units (5%) are rented and developed with private toilets and bathrooms, 6 units (8%) were abandoned, and left in an empty condition, 1 unit (1.5%) is under construction, 4 units (5%) were damaged.

Table 1. Dome houses condition in September 2022
(Source: survey, 2022-2023) Each dome house the Nglepen Village community has received cannot be sold to others.The phenomenon of dome houses being empty, rented out, or damaged is caused by the inhabitants moving to a new place that can better accommodate their activities.When inhabitants leave, the rest of the community will use the abandoned dome houses for tourism needs (as guest houses) or other activities that contribute to the sustainability of the community where they now live. .320,000 disaster victims were forced to leave and stay in temporary housing for around a year.The high death toll from Mount Merapi's volcanic eruption is because many people still reside in the hazardous area about 2-3 kilometers from the mountain's peak.
To ensure that the disaster victims no longer live in the disaster-prone locations as before, the surrounding Mount Merapi area, located more than 3 kilometers from the peak, is chosen for the postdisaster resettlement building project.The post-disaster reconstruction project carried out in the Yogyakarta post-earthquake 2006 development has the same name as the project: Community-based Social and Settlement Reconstruction Project (CSSRP) or Relokasi Masyarakat dan Permukiman Berbasis Komunitas (REKOMPAK).However, this settlement on Mount Merapi uses the word "resettlement" since it relocates settlements to a new, safe location.
The permanent house, a 6m by 6m building with two bedrooms, a living room, a dining room, and a kitchen, was built with brick walls, reinforced concrete columns, and tie beams to distribute loads.This model is a seed house concept that can be expanded and modified in the future.The funding was dispersed and put into the bank account of the POKMAS (community group), which the REKOMPAK facilitator supported as a consultative group of 10 to 20 households to supervise the reconstruction process.Each of these groups received assistance from facilitators, who are government employees, professionals, or university students assigned to direct early group discussion, funding distribution, the development process, material distribution, construction, and supervision.The government used the POKMAS as an intermediary to minimize leaks in funding distribution.
Besides providing house units, the government also built public facilities such as primary and environmental roads, public open spaces, mosques, clean water and sanitation drainage networks, wastewater treatment plants, public meeting halls and sports facilities, and communal livestock sheds.All these facilities were built to accommodate the inhabitants' needs to feel more comfortable in the resettlement area.It was found that the settlements in Pagerjurang Village had undergone significantly better alterations than those in Nglepen Village.In Pagerjurang Village, the residential houses are arranged according to family affiliation; hence, parents and children who live separately typically own two houses next to one other.In these circumstances, if their economic sector experiences an increase, they could merge two lots of houses into one more extensive and better house.This is consistent with the idea of improving building back better for recovery actions following a disaster.The fact that Pagerjurang Village's income has grown at a faster pace than Nglepen Village's is another factor contributing to this improvement.In addition to farming and maintaining livestock, most people in Pagerjurang Village run different side businesses.One of these is mining sand from Mount Merapi, which generates a significant amount of extra cash that may improve the local economy.According to the interview with the community representatives, many locals often have properties outside of Pagerjurang Village that they either rent out or use as investments.

Discussion
Consequently, it is essential to consider how to satisfy the house's inhabitants' individual requirements, traditions, and distinctive characteristics.Applying the adaptive house idea, which allows a house to change according to the needs of its inhabitants and developments in the environment, economics, and demographics, can address these challenges.
According to the case studies previously discussed, there exists identification that improved living conditions are a result of various factors related to sustainable development, such as additional space and functionality; these include taking into account the community-owned building's cultural context, social and cultural factors in the context of growth, economic factors that can support sustainable development, and the state of the supporting infrastructure.

Social and cultural context
The Pagerjurang community was more familiar with adapting to the new living conditions in the relocation area than the residents of Nglepen Village since they lived in temporary housing and settlements during the transitional period that had an environment similar to their current permanent residential areas.The dome house design will need more adaptation, reconstruction, and development efforts [17].
Pagerjurang resettlement housing was rapidly developed compared to Nglepen Village because, in Pagerjurang, the house design is more accessible to remodify and develop.House design that considers the local context element (a "vernacular" house concept design) and also the "mutual works" tradition aspect between the residents involved in the house development collaboration and resettlement process.The local social and cultural context regarding the people's social and cultural aspects will give more value to the house and the community's ability to develop sustainably better in the future [18].

Economic factor
The type of job occupation, the amount of revenue, and the basic needs are all closely related to the financial sector.The house development and sustainability priorities of each house displayed various distinctions due to the residents' varied work activities and progressive needs related to every household's economic factors.
Several households had to change their job occupancy since they had been resettled to adapt to their new living and settlement situation and conditions.Some beneficiaries who can not adjust to the new situation and conditions in the resettlement area choose to move to another place that can accommodate their needs better.

Infrastructure will support the new place attachment aspect.
To support sustainable development and enhance the community's sense of "place attachment" in their new environment, fully functional infrastructure amenities are essential.In the Nglepen Village, even though the government has considered the infrastructure and facilities that can accommodate the community's basic needs in the new place, several beneficiaries feel that their needs cannot be accommodated [19].This disappointment occurred because they were not involved in the development planning for implementing full contractor-based reconstruction at the Nglepen Village relocation project.They will return to their previous site even though their decision is illegal and dangerous, or they go somewhere to find a place to accommodate their needs better.

Conclusion
The lessons learned from post-disaster house reconstruction planning and development up to the sustainable development of the two case studies in Nglepen Village and Pagerjurang Village could be contextually adopted and developed to address further post-disaster house reconstruction issues through multiple strategies that accommodate the inhabitants' needs.
The social and cultural context of the relevant community, the supporting economy sector, and the infrastructure's completeness will significantly impact the sustainable development process.The community's post-disaster condition must be safer and better than before the disaster.
The government and all stakeholders must improve future post-disaster housing and settlement relocation planning and construction, involving the locals in deciding the location, constructing and managing the development plan, and creating all-encompassing sustainable development guidelines for their houses and living environment.As a recommendation to facilitate future post-disaster housing and 12 settlement rehabilitation and reconstruction through sustainable development, the government must be prepared and continue to implement an up-to-date mitigation and disaster management strategy.Identification of disaster hazards and risk maps, mitigation techniques, and regional-provincial land use master planning are all required components of the sustainable disaster management system.

Figure 7 .
Figure 7. Building transformation of the Nglepen dome house as of September 2023.(Source: author documentation, 2023)

Figure 8 .
Figure 8.The abandoned dome house was rebuilt into a guest house with a private bathroom and toilet.(Source:author documentation, 2023)

Figure 12 .
Figure 12.Building transformation of the Pagerjurang REKOMPAK house as of March 2023 (Source: author documentation, 2023)