<\/p>\n
JAKARTA \u2013 Jakarta is a city with countless stories. Behind the glitter of the city and rows of towering skyscrapers, there is life pulsing through narrow alleys, along riverbanks where every rainy season the water overflows into residential areas.<\/p>\n
Sometimes, this paradox thick with irony is strikingly close. Behind tall, magnificent office buildings and the luxury of shopping centers, there are pockets of poor residential settlements. This is how life has long unfolded in Jakarta. As buildings grow taller, villages sink deeper.<\/p>\n
Sea levels continue to rise, some of the water seeps into the ground, and river flows keep eroding the banks. In many places, permanent houses are built along riverbanks, even though the owners understand that floods loom every rainy season. It is not stubbornness; these people have countless reasons to remain attached to that land.<\/p>\n
In Jakarta, many areas are frequent flood zones. A little rain is enough for water to pool on the streets. When rain falls nonstop for a day, houses are inundated, even submerged. This cycle repeats itself.<\/p>\n
Yet communities in these areas have long become \u201cacquainted\u201d with the situation. Those living in low-lying areas, such as along the Ciliwung River, view floods as routine and unavoidable disasters. They simply endure when floods arrive, then repair their homes after the water recedes.<\/p>\n
This is how Jakarta residents respond to recurring floods. No longer shocked, they have calculated the risks and try to minimize the impact each rainy season. Muddy conditions and standing water no longer cause prolonged distress.<\/p>\n
Strategizing Amid Inundation<\/strong><\/p>\n Henni Tarigan is one of the thousands of Jakarta residents accustomed to floods. The woman, who lives near Teluk Gong in North Jakarta, admits her area is almost always inundated whenever heavy rain falls.<\/p>\n Densely packed houses, a crowded environment, and narrow access make standing water a daily sight. Even so, she chooses to stay for economic and location-related reasons.<\/p>\n Henni and her husband work not far from where they live. According to her, Teluk Gong is very strategic because it is close to their source of livelihood. Meanwhile, moving would require a considerable amount of money.<\/p>\n \u201cGiven the current economic conditions, if we moved, with our means we might only be able to go to Tangerang Regency. It\u2019s far, not strategic, and would certainly affect our jobs. We\u2019ve actually wanted to move for a long time, but those are the considerations,\u201d Henni told Validnews on Sunday (30\/12).<\/p>\n For that reason, the solution available to the 47-year-old woman and her family is gradual renovation. Whenever they have extra funds, they add floors, raise the building structure, and adjust the house to the rhythm of floods that come year after year.<\/p>\n \u201cOur house is built with three floors. The first floor is for the kitchen and motorbike parking, the second floor is our bedroom, and the third floor is the children\u2019s bedroom. For now, that\u2019s the only solution we can do,\u201d she explained.<\/p>\n Moving to another area, slightly outside Jakarta\u2019s administrative boundaries, there is Irene Patricia, who has lived for 24 years along the Angke River in the Gondrong area of Tangerang. Since childhood, she has lived side by side with fast-flowing water. Even without rain, water sent from upstream often seeps in and inundates the area around her home. Flooding has become a \u201crhythm of life\u201d she has known for a long time.<\/p>\n Representing her mother, Irene said that for her family, moving is not an option. The land where their house now stands is not merely a place to live. It is a trace of her parents\u2019 struggle after migrating from their hometown and, in 2001, managing to save enough money to buy a plot of land along the riverbank.<\/p>\n \u201cIt would be a shame to move,\u201d said the 23-year-old woman to Validnews on Monday (1\/12).<\/p>\n Economically, Irene\u2019s family is not among the underprivileged. Her parents\u2019 jobs are sufficient to generate adequate income, including the means to build a new house. But moving has never crossed their minds.<\/p>\n Rather than leaving a place full of memories, they chose to adapt by extensively renovating their house. Adding a second floor, raising the first floor, and preparing a special area to save motorcycles when floods come have become obligations.<\/p>\n \u201cOnly three houses around us are at the lowest position, about five meters from the river flow. It\u2019s exhausting, but leaving a place full of memories is far heavier,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n There is also the story of Ida Rusli (55), a resident of Blok Empang, Muara Angke, North Jakarta. Her story is more bitter, as she must face tidal flooding that can occur up to four times a month. Government warnings about potential tidal floods have become routine. Likewise, safety measures such as moving valuables to the second floor, keeping vehicles secure, and preparing for days when seawater rises uncompromisingly are common practices.<\/p>\n Like the others, Ida and her family have never considered moving as an option. Not because they do not want a more comfortable life, but as a fisherman\u2019s family with limited income, moving is almost impossible.<\/p>\n \u201cIt seems impossible to move,\u201d Ida told Validnews on Monday (1\/12).<\/p>\n As with Irene\u2019s family, for Ida and her family, the house is a repository of memories. Not because they ignore the risks, but because their current home is history, a source of livelihood, and an identity that is difficult to abandon.<\/p>\n Emotional and Social Bonds<\/strong><\/p>\n These three stories show the same common thread: the decision not to move is not merely about place, but about attachment. This was explained by Kasandra Putranto, a clinical psychologist from the Indonesian Psychological Association (IPK).<\/p>\n According to Kasandra, this aligns with research by Sari, Wahyuningtyas & Dimasiosz (2025), which states that several factors influence families to remain in flood-prone areas, including length of residence, strong social relationships, proximity to workplaces, and home ownership status that provides a sense of economic security.<\/p>\n Kasandra explained that emotional attachment, or place attachment, has a major influence on residents\u2019 decisions to stay. A sense of ownership over homes built through hard work, closeness to extended family and neighbors, and social networks that serve as sources of support all provide a sense of security that is difficult to replace.<\/p>\n \u201cThese factors are what make many families continue to choose to stay even though their environment has not fully recovered or remains high-risk,\u201d Kasandra told Validnews on Monday (1\/12).<\/p>\n When forced to move to a new place, many experience anxiety about their ability to adapt, the loss of social support, changes in routines, and feelings of alienation because the new environment lacks the same emotional meaning.<\/p>\n \u201cThis condition can trigger stress, uncertainty, and a sense of losing control over their lives,\u201d Kasandra said.<\/p>\n Emotional attachment often works alongside economic factors, according to sociologist Yusar Muljadi from Padjadjaran University. He said many residents stay because they lack sufficient capital to move to safer places. They are low-income groups with no alternative housing options.<\/p>\n On the other hand, some groups have historical ties to their areas. For example, coastal fishermen or communities dependent on rivers are culturally and economically bound to their environment.<\/p>\n Yusar interprets this condition as a form of \u201cmaking peace with disasters\u201d or active adaptation.<\/p>\n \u201cJust as Japanese communities adapt to earthquakes and floods through technology and infrastructure, communities in disaster-prone areas in Indonesia also try to adjust to continuous risks,\u201d Yusar told Validnews on Tuesday (2\/12).<\/p>\n However, he warned that adaptation should not be a burden borne by communities, especially if disasters are caused by human actions. Disasters should ideally happen only once, then be prevented from recurring through better policies and environmental management.<\/p>\n The Failure of Relocation Programs<\/strong><\/p>\n Social observer and sociologist from Ibnu Chaldun University Jakarta, Musni Umar, highlighted educational inequality as one of the main factors why some residents choose to remain in disaster-prone areas. According to him, education shapes how a person perceives reality, including harmful floods. Those with higher education generally better understand risks and are more open to relocation options than staying in places that continuously cause losses.<\/p>\n \u201cConversely, groups with lower education levels often have minimal safety awareness, making it difficult for them to accept the idea of moving to an entirely new place,\u201d he explained to Validnews on Wednesday (3\/12).<\/p>\n It is therefore unsurprising that many relocation programs offered by the government often end in rejection. Relocation, according to Musni, cannot rely solely on providing replacement housing, given the deep bond a home has with the land on which it stands.<\/p>\n \u201cIts success is largely determined by the involvement of religious leaders, community leaders, and persuasive approaches that build public awareness rather than merely relocating people administratively,\u201d he emphasized.<\/p>\n Meanwhile, sociologist Yusar Muljadi stressed that relocation is a process of cultural change. Moving residents means shifting them from social, economic, and identity environments they have known for decades.<\/p>\n Both Musni and Yusar share the view that long-term solutions cannot rely solely on disaster mitigation or emergency assistance. Both emphasize the need for strong and consistent regulations to preserve the environment. Essentially, natural disasters like floods are signs of damaged and weakened ecosystems.<\/p>\n Looking further, urban planning observer from the University of Indonesia, Muh. Azis Muslim, explained that relocation is not merely about moving residents from point A to point B, but about considering whether their lives and livelihoods will be better in the new place. Many residents live close to sources of income, social networks, and facilities they already know.<\/p>\n According to Azis, for relocation to succeed, the state must provide fair compensation and complete basic facilities such as education, healthcare, business spaces, transportation, and access to jobs. Without these, relocation merely shifts problems from one place to another.<\/p>\n \u201cThat is why relocation is often rejected. Not simply because residents do not want to move, but because they do not see a clear future in the new location,\u201d Azis told Validnews on Tuesday (2\/12).<\/p>\n Nevertheless, Azis believes relocation sometimes needs to be an option when risks become too great. However, the ideal solution remains improving spatial planning and strengthening mitigation.<\/p>\n Public education, early warning systems, infrastructure maintenance, and risk-based spatial planning are key so residents can live safely without being forced to move. He also encouraged Jakarta to learn from global cities such as Rotterdam, Tokyo, and Singapore, which have proven that modern drainage systems, strict spatial planning, and integrated water management can protect residents from recurring disasters.<\/p>\n The Urgency of Improving Spatial Planning<\/strong><\/p>\n Azis noted that flooding and residential vulnerability in Jakarta cannot be separated from a history of neglected spatial planning. Many areas now densely populated were once water catchment zones, as reflected in area names such as Rawa Mangun, Rawa Badak, and Rawa Buaya.<\/p>\n Over time, however, land-use changes have occurred massively. Areas that should have functioned as water absorption zones were converted into residential and industrial areas without adequate spatial discipline.<\/p>\n \u201cAs a result, the land\u2019s ability to absorb water has drastically decreased. When heavy rains come, flooding becomes inevitable,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n Lack of discipline in spatial planning and human behavior that shows little environmental concern, in Azis\u2019s view, are the main factors worsening this condition. Technically, he pointed out several fundamental weaknesses in urban planning, namely aggressive development on catchment areas, poorly connected drainage systems, and development approaches oriented only toward short-term projects.<\/p>\n \u201cInfrastructure such as drainage systems, embankments, and water pumps should have their capacity calculated, be planned sustainably, and maintained regularly,\u201d Azis stressed.<\/p>\n Unfortunately, infrastructure maintenance is often neglected. An example can be seen in cracks in embankments in the Pantai Mutiara area, which indicate weak quality and minimal maintenance. Azis emphasized the importance of sustainable urban planning integrated with disaster mitigation. Cities must be designed based on hydrological capacity calculations, water flow systems, and long-term disaster risks.<\/p>\n \u201cLarge infrastructure such as the East Flood Canal (BKT) and West Flood Canal (BKB) does help, but without comprehensive planning and regular evaluation, these efforts are not sufficient to address flooding problems,\u201d he explained.<\/p>\n In Jakarta, the distribution of flood-prone areas is fairly widespread. In East Jakarta, areas such as Kampung Melayu and Pulo Gadung have neighborhoods that frequently flood. In North Jakarta, Cilincing, Pluit, and Penjaringan often face similar conditions. Central Jakarta includes Sawah Besar, Senen, and Johar Baru. Meanwhile, in South Jakarta, Pancoran, Jagakarsa, Pesanggrahan, and Cilandak are also regular flood zones.<\/p>\n Staying Does Not Mean Enduring<\/strong><\/p>\n Psychologist Kasandra observed that many people\u2019s choice to remain in flood-prone or disaster-prone areas does not necessarily represent resilience. According to her, the choice to stay often brings impacts that are not immediately visible. When residents appear accustomed to and able to endure disasters, the reality may be different and far more complex.<\/p>\n \u201cNormalizing disasters is not a sign that someone has become stronger. Psychologically, this condition is referred to as the habituation fallacy, a mistaken belief that repeated exposure to disasters makes a person more immune,\u201d Kasandra told Validnews on Monday (1\/12).<\/p>\n In fact, according to various studies, repeated exposure or trauma actually increases the risk of stress, anxiety, and distress in subsequent experiences. This means those who seem \u201cfine\u201d when floods arrive may simply be engaging in daily adaptation to survive, not that they are truly unaffected.<\/p>\n Kasandra emphasized the importance of support for disaster-affected communities, in this case flood victims in Jakarta. To address the direct impacts of disasters, psychosocial protection approaches are crucial.<\/p>\n Despite being accustomed to floods, Kasandra believes communities living along riverbanks that are repeatedly hit by floods also experience trauma, whether severe or mild, each time floods occur. \u201cThis is intended to maintain the mental health of residents who continue to live in disaster-prone areas,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n Therefore, support for residents in flood-prone areas, in various forms, remains necessary to ensure they do not sink into anxiety and depression.<\/p>\n Dr. Muh Azis Muslim, M.Si.
Lecturer in Public Administration<\/p>\n