1. Defining Informal Settlement in Indonesia
Jimly Al Faraby
M.Sc Student in Spatial Planning for Regions in Growing Economies, TU Dortmund, Germany
As a developing country, Indonesia deals with what is called as “informal
settlement”, a phenomenon which can be found in all cities in Indonesia. Nowadays,
the term of “informal settlement” has been common to use in many occasions, such as
academic discussions, government discussions, and public discussions. Even though it
is true to say that it is not simple to define such term because there is no single
specific definition officially given by the authorities to describe it, such term can be
more easily understood by describing what is usually considered as an informal
settlement, and comparing its characteristics with some related ideas.
In Indonesia, the term of “informal settlement” usually refers to an area of
unplanned settlement which emerges spontaneously and organically, on inappropriate
or marginal land, such as river banks, sides of railway, and so on. It is usually
associated with illegal or insecure land tenure because the residents usually occupy a
parcel of land illegally (without owning or paying for compensation to the owner).
Hence, they are vulnerable to the eviction. Informal settlement is also associated with
an area of settlement which lack of basic infrastructures, such as water and sanitation,
and have poor quality of house and environment.
Based on that common understanding of “informal settlement”, it seems that
the term of informal settlement is quiet alike to what Patton and Subanu (1988) have
mentioned as Kampung (kampong, in English). However, it is necessary to bear in
mind that not all kampung are considered informal. Patton and Subanu (1988)
identified two kinds of kampung. One is the consistently poor, overcrowded, and
centrally located kampung, and the other is the less crowded, peripheral, and typically
higher-income kampung. The first one tends to be considered as the informal
settlement, in common sense. In addition, not all households in kampung meet the
description of informal settlement. Some of them are the legal landowners or renter,
and some of them even have good houses. In line with this idea, McGee in
Roychansyah (2010) also noticed that kampung actually represents two sides of socio-
economic structures in a city, between traditional and modernity, formal and informal,
and legal and illegal activities.
Even though kampung has two sides in its characteristics, considering
kampung as a form of informal settlement in Indonesia has been widely accepted. At
least there are two explanations behind this consideration. Firstly, the majority of
households living in kampung meet the description of what people think about the

2. characteristics of an informal settlement, regarding to the land status, land security,
income level, house quality, and access to basic infrastructures. Only a small part of
them do not meet such description. Thus, in general, the entire area can be considered
as an informal settlement. Another explanation, and this can be a key point for this
consideration, kampung is considered as a form of informal settlement in Indonesia
due to its formation process which is spontaneous, autonomous, unplanned, and
without any formal procedure. And for this reason, there is no distinction.
The formation process of informal settlement (kampung) in Indonesia cannot
be separated from the urbanization process. Urban with all of its attractiveness has
attracted people from rural area to come and live in urban area, with the main
intention is to get jobs. Many of them are less educated and unskilled. Therefore, they
usually work in informal sectors, which do not require high-level skill and
specialities, such as pedicab drivers, beggars, hawkers, scavengers, and so on.
Unfortunately, such occupations cannot give them enough money to support their
lives in the urban area properly. One of the result, they cannot afford normal house
like average people have.
These outsiders, the rural people who migrate to urban, then start to build their
houses in smaller size and from non-permanent materials on the marginal land,
without any formal planning and permit procedure. At the beginning, there are usually
only a few households who live on such site. But the local authorities usually do not
take action immediately to respond to this small number. Consequently, over time the
number of households living there is getting more and more, and the number of
houses built is getting more too. Then, the living system begins to take shape, and
then it becomes more complex, and finally turns into a settlement which keeps
growing spontaneously.
Because of the limitation of space, the residents have to live closely together
in a high-density settlement. Various space functions and activities exist as the part of
their living system. In one side, this condition has brought positive effects for the
residents. For instance, in term of social living Patton and Subanu (1988) noted that
the social tradition, neighborliness, community cohesiveness, and mutual assistances
(gotong-royong) have become prominent to support their life. In addition,
Roychansyah (2010) saw this condition as an opportunity to apply “compact city
development” concept in Indonesia.
But in the other side, kampung as a form of informal settlement is even more
often to turn into slum because it is overcrowded. That is why kampung is associated
with slum. Thus, it is not wondering if UU Perumahan dan Kawasan Permukiman
Indonesia Tahun 2011 (Indonesian Housing and Settlement Act 2011) uses the term
of “slum” rather than “informal settlement”, which is defined as a settlements that is
unfit for habitation because of the disorganized buildings layout, high density of
buildings, and low quality of buildings and infrastructures. The term of “slum” in this

3. act will not only refer to informal and squatter settlement, but also formal and legal
settlement which has such conditions. It seems that the government more concern
about the quality of the settlement rather than the formation process of the settlement.
References:
Patton, C. V., and Subanu, L. P., 1988, Meeting Shelter Needs to Indonesia,
Spontaneus Shelter: International Perspectives and Prospects, pp. 168-190,
Temple University Press, Philadelphia
Roychansyah, Muhammad Sani, 2010, Kampung as Core Model of Urban
Compaction Development: Yogyakarta Initiative, Proceedings 8th Academic
Forum “To Solve Social Problem through Art and Cultural Activities: Theory and
Practice“, Urban Research Plaza on March 17, Yogyakarta Subcenter, Yogyakarta
Zhu, Jieming, 2010, Symmetric Development of Informal Settlements and Gated
Communities: Capacity of the State - The Case of Jakarta, Indonesia, Asia
Research Institute Working Paper Series No. 135, Asia Research Institute,
Singapore