19960623ー0630：インドネシア Jakarta：インドネシア科学院LIPI都市コミュニティの社会経済的問題 東南アジアの衛星都市（ニュータウン）の計画と開発：布野修司 P.Nas（ライデン大学）
THE SELF-CONTAINED URBAN COMMUNITIES BASED ON THE ECOLOGICAL BALANCE
IN THE REGION
SHUJI FUNO
ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR
DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE and ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN
FACULTY OF ENGINEERING
KYOTO UNIVERSITY
Preface
I Lessons from Great Hanshin Earthquake
II Lessons from Japanese Experiences
III Resettlement(SITES AND SERVICES) Projects
in Southeast Asian Countries and Kampung
as a Model of Urban Community
Research Program
Preface
I have been in charge
with the field work on kampungs(urban villages) in Surabaya, Indonesia, for
these 15 years with Prof. Johan Silas (ITS Institute Teknologi Surabaya). He
always teaches me a lot about what human settlements are or should be. I believe
kampung is so interesting as a model of urban community. I am concerned about how the characteristics
of kampung as an urban community can be developed to the neighborhood unit of a
new town in Southeast Asian countries.
The Great Hanshin Earthquake
taught us the importance of the autonomy of urban community. I would like to
discuss about what the urban settlement should be, based on my view of the
Japanese experience as well as the field survey on kampungs of Surabaya in this
paper.
I Lessons from GREAT HANSHIN EARTHQUAKE
In the early morning on
January 17, 1995, we had experienced the Great Hanshin Earthquake. Over 6,000
people were killed by the building collapsed, flying objects(furnitures) and
the fires. About 300,000 people have lost their houses and were compelled to
live in the temporary shelters until the end of August 1995 when the emergency
houses were barely completed. Still, several thousands of population are living
illegally in the tents at the public parks.
Just after the Great
Hanshin Earthquake, I walked through the area damaged 30 km from east and west
several times.
What I saw was the death
of the town or the dying city. I had never known it can happen that the city
dies.
And at the same time I saw
the scene that the city is going to be rebirth. I knew the
importance of unity and solidarity of urban community.
The Great Hanshin
Earthquake taught us many things in terms of urban planning and urban
communities.
(a) The Power of Nature
Those who live in the
metropolis in the developed countries tend to believe we can completely control
the nature. But we understand that is not correct when we have disasters, i.e.,
floods, typhoon and earthquake. We are likely to forget the fears of the nature. As the speed of urbanization
grows faster, the ・waste land and swampy land that was formally
unsuitable for human living have been
being developed. Cutting the hills and reclaiming the sea was thought to be
killing two birds with one stone. Nevertheless, we never forget the power of
the nature.
It is very important to
survey the sites carefully and assess the environment in detail when we
construct the new towns.
On the other hand, we
can reconfirm the splendid power of the nature. I'd seen the trees in front of
houses that protected them from fire. It is also very important to use the
potentialities of the land and the natural surroundings.
(b) The Limitations of Urban
Development Strategies
Those who were damaged
the most severely this time are the weak of the societies living in the inner
city, the handicapped, the urban poor, the foreigners and so on. The fact
reveals the results and evidences that the local governments had not improved
inner areas that had needed environmental improvement programs. They had given
priorities over the developments of the new town like promoters and developers,
because it is more effective to develop the city from the economical view
points. As a result, they had ignored and putted off the urban renewal
projects. The Great Hanshin Earthquake reveals the limits of urban growth ・development
strategies.
(c) The Weakness of the
Networks of Urban Infrastructures
The faults of systems of
infrastructures are also recognized. All the railroad lines and trunk roads run
from east to west and those from north to south are very few because of the
conditions of topography.
The systems of water,
electricity and gas supply services, had the same faults. There are no
alternatives and double systems. We need multi-pole network systems in place of
one-pole centered systems.
(d) The Scarcity of Public
spaces
The most useful
facilities to recover the urban communities are public(elementary and
secondary) schools for shelter and convenience stores for food supply.
Neighborhood facilities are very important in case of emergency as well as in
daily life. It was very serious that hospitals, offices of local government, ・fire
station and police station were destroyed. We knew that the
We should build public facilities based on the high standards.
The scarcity of urban
public spaces(parks, playgrounds, sport fields) was fatal because we had even
no spaces to build emergency houses after disasters.
(e) The Importance of the
Autonomy of Urban Settlements
The situations that
people only had been seeing their houses being burned and hearing the call for
help without nothing to do because of no means, were miserable. We need water,
foods and other daily necessaries in the neighborhood units. We had buried the
well and covered the river for convenience, so there was no water around us to
put out the fire. The urban settlements
should be self-supported.
The autonomy of urban
community is so important to help each other.
(f) The Possibilities of
Volunteers in Urban Planing
The volunteers worked
hard and well to recover the damage. Japan had no volunteer system, but
volunteers gathered spontaneously. We recognize Non-Profit Organization has to
be organized as a network system to help the daily life as well as emergent
situation.
The reconstruction
programs after Great Hanshin Earthquake do not necessarily go well because of
many reasons. Community architecture has not roots in Japanese society yet.
People's participation and bottom up process are inevitable in urban development,
especially in urban renewal.
II THE JAPANESE EXPERIENCES
1 The Subjects through the History of Japanese
Urban Planning Policies and Technologies
The history of urban
planning in Japan is divided into several periods as follows.
(1) The period introducing
the European way of urban reform (1868-87): Ginza commercial block made of
brick and the Hibiya districts offices of central government were concentrated
on, were constructed by foreign architect in this period. (2) Shikukaisei(city
block reform) period(1880-1918): Tokyo municipal ordinance of urban planning
that is the first one in Japan was enforced. (3) The period establishing the
urban planning system (1910-1935): The first urban planning law and building
code was made in 1919. (4) The period
during war(1931-45):Ironically speaking, We had the only chance to realize the
idea of modern urban planning in the colony like Taiwan, Manshu(North Eastern
China). (5) The period of reconstructing(1945-54) (6) The period of urban
development(1955-68) (7) The period establishing new urban planning
system(1968-85) (8) The period of anti-planning (1982-1993)
However, we have the same
problems in terms of urban planning policies and technologies from the
beginning of its history.
a The lack of originality:
We have always been importing the concepts and systems of urban planning from
the western countries. We introduced the way of Baron Haussmann's grand project
of Paris at the beginning, Nazi's idea of national land planning during the world war II, the concept of
Greater London plan after the world war II, German B-plan in the early 80s, and
so on. It is not bad to learn the foreign systems, but it does not necessarily
work well in different context.
b The absence of
subjectivity in urban planning: passiveness of people: Who plan and design the
city is not clear in Japan. Local government that is controlled by central
government does not have all the authority to decide the matter related urban
planning. In addition, we have not established the systems of people's
participation and advocate planning.
c The weakness of
financial background specialized in urban planning:The unstable planning board:
We have not special funds for urban planning that depends on the budget year by
year.
d The immaturity of public
sense that limit the private right for urban planning: Japan is said to be the
most free country for designing the building because of no close relation
between the building code and the urban planning law(block regulations).
e 'Scrap and build' urban
process:The poorness of urban stocks: We have been repeating scrap and built
for this half century after the war.
2 Postwar Japanese Experience towards New Town
Policies
The Japanese metropolises
received the greatest damage during the war, so that reconstruction efforts
were naturally concentrated on term, however, the national economy, focused on
basic industries, needed to be reconstructed quickly.
Just one year after the
war, the Special City Planning Law was enacted and large scale reconstruction
plans were laid for several cities. The Capital Construction Law was passed in
1950. This law established the Capital Construction Committee, a national
organization devoted to the goal of Tokyo's reconstruction, determined the
Emergency five-year Capital Construction Plan. However, under the severe
economic conditions that prevailed, it was impossible to effectively realize
these plans and they were left for the next generation to solve.
The postwar
reconstruction of economy was completed roughly ten years after the end of the
war. There were enormous concentrations of population and industries in the
metropolises, particularly Tokyo, and a depopulation in the provinces. Problems
such as the rapid expansion of urbanized areas, shortage of housing, increased
land use prices and confusion in land became manifest in the metropolitan
areas, and their solution became an extremely urgent policy issue.
A Capital Region
Development Plan came to be seriously considered in order to control such
excessive concentration of population. To this end, a Capital Region
Development Law was enacted in 1956 to replace the Capital Construction Law of
1950.
This Plan was modeled on
the Great London Plan and was based on the idea of strong controls. In order to
carry it out, a law promoting the construction of industrial satellite cities
and another restricting factory location in existing urbanized areas was passed
in 1958. These industrial satellite cities were intended to be similar in
function to English New Towns, but most
of them were built as new industrial developments in the suburbs of
exiting cities.
Earlier, the Japan
Housing Corporation(now the Japan Housing and Urban Development Corporation)
had been established in 1955 as semi-public organization to carry out
large-scale housing construction and housing site development in metropolitan
areas. This represented a task force for constructing large housing development
and new towns, and its activities ushered in a new era in new town construction
in Japan.
However, it should be
noted that the new towns that were created were very different from the self
contained New Towns of England that provided both places of work and housing.
This was in a sense the inevitable result of the conditions prevailing in Japan
at the time and an expression of the nature of planning in Japan as well.
It soon became clear that
the Capital Region Development Plan was unrealistic in that it underestimated
the pressures of industrial and population concentration in the metropolises.
In particular, the idea of green belts was totally ineffective in the face of
the sprawl into the suburbs in the 1960s. As a result, a reevaluation of the
plan became necessary. The Capital Region Development Law was revised in 1965,
and the second Capital Region Development Master Plan was established in 1968.
The construction of new
towns, gathering momentum, received great attention. New towns were built one
after another in the suburbs, being intended for middle-income level families.
The New Residential Built-up Area Development Law and the Law for the
Infrastructure Development of New Cities are notable as measures that dealt
realistically with metropolitan development. There were various advances in
city planning and national land planning.
Japan's period of
intensive economic growth gave way to a period of low, stable growth with the
energy crisis. The focus had been considered to be going to shift from outward
urban expansion to the fuller development of already urbanized areas.
But what came after the
stable growth period was bubble economy. Nobody could expect the bubble
economies attack the whole islands of Japan from the end of 1980s.
But the bubble economy
has gone. The paradigm in terms of urban planning is shifting again. There will
be fewer large-scale projects and greater interest in creating communities and
enriching the people's immediate environment;instead of plans concerned with
hardware,i.e. facilities. There will be greater interest in creating urban
culture.
Then Great Hanshin
Earthquake revealed the weakness of the tradition of urban planning in Japan.
3 Japanese New Towns
What are called new towns
in Japan are different in nature from English New Towns as has already been
mentioned. Most of what are called new towns in Japan are residential cities in
the suburbs of metropolises, that is, bedroom towns.
The construction of
residential towns was actively promoted by the Japan Housing Corporation
established in 1955. The housing
developments it built were occupied mostly by white collar workers with
jobs in the metropolitan center.
With successive projects,
the location of the new towns became further removed from the center of the
city. Although these were also called new towns, they were communities in which
the heads of households usually worked elsewhere and the family members spent
the greater part of the day within the new towns that had their own shopping,
medical, educational and social welfare services. These clearly should have
been called dormitory towns in the metropolitan suburbs.
Why in planning new towns
in Japan work places and housing are not considered together. In other words,
industrial developments represent the introduction of places of work in areas
where there are already housing available and dormitory towns represent the
creation of housing for people who already have work elsewhere. Thus the idea
to physically link the two types were never taken seriously, and planners
simply did not have the leeway to make the detailed studies of the family
organization and way of life of workers who were expected to live in the
communities.
Behind these
developments, it should be noted, was first of all the great force of
urbanization in postwar Japan. It turned out to be impossible to appropriately
direct this powerful force of urbanization by a green belt. Eventually the
green belt was abandoned. Tokyo Region was extended about 50 km from the center
of the city and it was decided to carry out systematic development of the
suburbs. This suburban development represents the Japanese approach to new
towns.
The heads of households
must bear the burden of commuting, other family members can lead lives in an
otherwise self-contained community. The question is whether such a distorted
social structure is suitable for a city for human beings.
The stage of social and
economic development and the rate of development differ with each country.
Every country must find its own method suited to its own historical situation.
The suburban new towns of Japan were the products of Japan's own stage of
historical development and are not a universal solution.
III Resettlement(SITES AND SERVICES) Projects
in Southeast Asian Countries and Kampung
as a Model of Urban Community
1 Resettlement Projects in
Southeast Asian Countries
How to solve the urban
problems is the major object of planning and housing policies in Southeast
Asian countries as well as other developing countries. Each country has its own
policies and strategies for the problems according to its own situations.
Mass production housing
system supplying people with a huge amount of dwelling units by public
authorities is the most popular system each country had adopted in the first
stage. But it soon became clear that such a western idea of housing does not necessarily
take effect to the actual conditions in Southeast Asian countries. The reasons
for which supplying high rise residential areas do not go well to solve the
urban problems are that low cost housing projects cost much more money than
other pro jects and can not supply the quantity of dwelling units needed. Low
cost housing could not be low income housing in the real situation.
Furthermore, we can also point out that the modern form of house did not fit to
way of life that differs cultural backgrounds and could not be accepted by
people.
Slum clearance &
redevelopment program is also the major strategy to solve the problems
directly. But it is not easy to clear the slum because the problems are deeply
connected with the social, economical and political structure of each country.
It was often said that slum clearance ends creating new slum elsewhere as a
result. Slum clearances rather tend to expand contradictions in society and be
resisted.
Resettlement projects aim
at decentralizing over populations in urban center to suburbs or rural areas
but did not go well because they often lack the provision for various
facilities and people can not get the opportunities for jobs. It is also a
cause that they are costly.
Much has been said and
written about sites and services projects. Many people may consider sites and
services projects to be nothing more or less than only creators of new slum
neighborhoods and would like to see them definitively abolished. Certainly in
case that sites and services projects are realized as resettlement projects we
can see the phenomena inhabitants go back to the previous urban areas. It was a
fact that projects areas became new slums soon. But there are others who
support them and claim that such projects, well planned and realized, should
constitute one of the new forms or means that are within the reach of the
poorest levels of the population. I think experience during these decades has
shown that they are not valid for all, but the possibilities should be pursued
more. Core house projects carried out with sites and services are interesting
from an architectural view point. Combining more alternatives and elements,
there can be possibilities creating various environments. Sites and services
projects should be integrated into their local environment, avoiding the
previous error of isolation. The location of its habitants, recreational
facilities, commercial centers, means of transportation should be taken into
account.
The subject is how the
self-contained community can be created.
2 Kampung as a Model of
Urban Community
Most of kampungs is in
poor condition physically and economically, but are not necessarily poor
socially. It should be emphasized that kampung is not a slum. Kampung shows
different appearances from urban settlements in western cities. Destruction of
social structure, wicked acts, criminal acts are not rarely seen in the
kampung. It is not a discriminated settlement but community that has own system
and value.
The characteristics of
kampung that has own values as an urban community to be noticed are as follows.
(1) Variety of Kampungs
Each kampung has its own
characteristics, which varies with its
location (distance from the city center), constitution of income groups,
migratory backgrounds of inhabitants or mobility of population, its history its
spatial pattern and so on. So it is a
little bit hard to talk about kampung in general that is the reason we classify kampungs at least into
three i.e. urban kampung, fringe kampung, and rural kampung, according to their
location.
It's very important that
distribution of various kampungs give alternatives when people choose the place
to live. Even the poorest income group
can find some kampungs to live. As
J.Silas pointed out, variety of kampungs is only a solution to the housing
problems at the moment.
Residential areas in
Japan are rather monotonous and homogeneous everywhere and are losing their
localities and identities. It's very
interesting various kampungs scattered widely in the city.
(2) Kampung as a Whole
World
Kampung is not only a
residential area. New town in Japan is
often called Bed town because it has no other functions except sleeping
(staying). But kampung produces many
things by home industry. Kampung has
both functions of production and consumption, which is different from Bed town
in Japan that only consume goods.
Circulation system of
goods is not so simple but it is a characteristic that circle of production and
consumption can be closed within the kampung.
Living place is very near to workplace, which means that all the
activities can be carried out in the
neighborhood.
Kampung itself is
parasitic on various facilities of the city and cannot survive without earning
money from outside the kampung. But
kampung life is autonomous.
(3) Heterogeneity of
Kampung
Kampung is not a
homogeneous community. Rich people used
to live next to poor people. Complexity
of inhabitants is a characteristic of
kampung. It is sure that people from
same region tend to live in the same area.
But relationships between different groups are not always
exclusive. It should be noticed that
rich people support the life of the poor even in poorest kampung.
(4) Kampung as a Highly
Serviced Society ---Rombung Culture
Everybody can get almost
all the kinds of foods and goods for daily life within the kampung, because
Rombung (float) and street peddler (Vendor) always served inhabitants. Many kinds of Vendors had visited down town
area of Tokyo before, but Japan lost such Rombung culture.
It is because
opportunities of getting jobs are very few that we can see many rombungs and
vendors in the kampung. But to the inhabitants, kampung is a highly serviced
society.
(5) Mutual Aid System
---Gotong Royonag, Arisan
Kampung has a
hierarchical administration system.
RT-RW system looks like a top-down system, and it is said Japanese
armies introduce that kind of system (Tonarigumi or Chounaikai) to Indonesia.
But on the other hand, it is also pointed out that traditional society
has such kind of community organization system.
In any case, the spirits of mutual aid characterize kampung
community. Gotong Royong activities and
Arisan system are indispensable to kampung life.
(6) Preservation of
Traditional Culture
It is often seen in the
kampung that newcomers build the same style of house as that in rural village
from where they come. People tend to
preserve the traditional way of life, which is also one of characteristics of
the kampung. The standard type of
kampung house has of course a relation to the rural traditional house in East
Jawa. Kampung should be considered to be a settlement that has own vernacular
values in Indonesia.
(7) Kampung Housing as a
Process
As chapter IV describes
housing in the kampung is a process.
Kampung is generated by accumulating many housing processes of various
inhabitants.
(8) Complexity of Ownership
Relations
It is one of the major
characteristics that ownership relations are complicated. Modern land laws introduced by Dutch and
traditional laws (Adat) coexist in the kampung.
Relations between primary right and secondary right are not easily
understood for foreigners.
Research Program
I think the evaluation of
resettlement projects during these days is inevitable for the purpose of
research program on new town in Southeast Asia. It is interesting to compare
the selected settlements in the resettlement projects in Southeast Asia.
I completely agree that
there is not sufficient attention given to the non-physical, thus so-called
urban problems, such as income disparities, unemployment, poverty,
deteriorating quality of the environment, crime, persist. But physical aspects
of urban planning must not be forgotten because the limit of urban ecological
resources that support people' life, is anticipated to be critical. It is easy
to understand the situation in case that all the inhabitants begin to use the
machine like air conditioning. The city should be based on the ecological balance
in the region.
The content of the study
I consider to be appropriate is the same
of the studies we've done in Surabaya. Of course, citywide data will be needed,
but we need more data in detail on case study area.
The selected areas are the
same way and format. The methods and contents of the survey are as follows.
That is based on the so called design survey or urban anthropological approach.
I think we need this kind of intensive study to understand the more complicated
realities in addition to global survey of the city.
A. General Observation and
Collecting Open Data
The statistical
population data is collected at the levels of neighborhood units of
administrative community in the first place and constitutions of community
organization are grasped. In Surabaya,
the aerial photos of the kampungs can be used. Distributions of public
facilities are investigated by general observation in the first step.
B. Selection of Area or
Street to be surveyed in detail
Several neighborhood
units or streets are selected for detail survey based on general survey.
(i) Basic neighborhood unit
we focus on is minimum unit like RT (Rukung Tatangga) in Indonesia.
(ii) Neighborhood unit is
often formalized along the street. So, street is selected for survey unit. A street includes 2 or 3 Neighborhood units
in some cases. The function and width of
street are very important to outside life.
That's the one of the reason we choose a street as a survey unit.
(iii) The living conditions
of streets or areas are not the same even in the same district. Land price is different according to the
accessibility to the vehicle road. So,
several survey units are selected for comparison.
C. Descriptions of Physical
Environment
Regarding streets (areas)
selected, site plan and street facade (elevation) are drawn and recorded for
the basis of analysis. House plan,
section and elevation are also draw by measurement partially as for the houses
picked up for hearing to inhabitants. The changing speed of areas is more rapid
than that we imagine. It's necessary to
record the physical environment for grasping changes even after one year.
D. Mapping Activities in
kampungs
It's not enough only to
describe the physical environment. How
the open spaces for facilities are used should be recorded. Activity Map is made by plotting various
activities on the base map. Temporary markets, becak parking, rombong places,
langgar (or Masjid) and so on are very important to kampung life in Indonesia.
E. Hearing to Households
Picking up some
households in the selected streets, we
put questions to inhabitants. The items
we ask are as follows.
a. Household structure and attributes of
household members (especially the family head)
b. Mobility background/birthplace,previous
address, date of coming, etc.
c. Economic background/total income, jobs, lace
of work, expenditure pattern,
d. Type of residence/function, structure, etc.
e. House and land ownership
f. physical Organization of house and facilities
g. Building Process
h. Community backgrounds
i. Activities for maintenance
j. Opinions to environment and house condition
f. Hearing to the Head of
the community 7
THE SELF-CONTAINED URBAN COMMUNITIES BASED ON THE ECOLOGICAL ・BALANCE
IN THE REGION
SHUJI FUNO
ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR
DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE and ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN
FACULTY OF ENGINEERING
KYOTO UNIVERSITY
My name is Shuji Funo. My
first name is easy to remember. Who ・knows(Funo's)? Nobody knows
is the answer.
My major subjects are
Housing and Regional（Urban） Planning. I am also
a kind of critic on architecture, so published several books in Japanese.
Honestly speaking, this is
the first time to lecture in English in Kyoto University. I refuse this lecture
because of my poor English. But my boss did not accept my wish.
I am graduated from Tokyo
University (Faculty of Engineering, Department of Architecture). I taught
theory of architecture and urban planning at Toyo University that located in the
suburbs of Tokyo. Then I moved to Kyoto University in 1991 and am in charge
with the studio of Planning Theory and Design of Architecture and Human
Environment.
I started the research
work on human settlements in Southeast Asia in 1978 with the colleagues of Toyo
University. We carried out research project titled "Transitional Process
of Kampungs and Evaluation of KIP in Indonesia" jointly with ITS (ITS
Institute Teknologi Surabaya) research Group leaded by Prof. Johan Silas.
I have been in charge with
the field work on kampungs(urban villages) in Surabaya, Indonesia, for these 15
years with Prof. Johan Silas. He always teaches
me a lot about what human settlements are or should be. I believe
kampung is so interesting as a model of urban community. I am concerned about how the characteristics
of kampung as an urban community can be developed to the neighborhood unit of a
new town in Southeast Asian countries.
Later I will show you slides
and sumarize my view point of kampung and outline of the reseach work.
After moving to Kyoto
University, I am concentrated on the human settlements in Lombok island. We
discovered a unique Hindu city named Cakranegara.
All what I would like to
emphasize today is expressed only in the title. Though I am afraid that I have
not discussed nothing, I believe the autonomy of urban community is important
besides all.
SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC ISSUES IN URBAN COMMUNITIES:
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT OF SATELLITE TOWN
(NEW TOWNS) IN SOUTHEAST ASIA
THE SELF-CONTAINED URBAN COMMUNITIES
BASED ON THE ECOLOGICAL BALANCE IN THE REGION
SHUJI FUNO
ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR
DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE and ENVIROMENTAL DESIGN
FACULTY OF ENGINEERING
KYOTO UNIVERSITY
25-27 JUNE 1996
INDONESIAN INSTITUTE OF SCIENCES
THE SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES
PROGRAM OF SOUTHEAST ASIAN STUDIES
インドネシア科学院LIPI都市コミュニティの社会経済的問題 東南アジアの衛星都市（ニュータウン）の計画と開発
布野修司 P.Nas（ライデン大学
インドネシア科学院（社会科学人文系）ワークショップ
「都市コミュニティの社会経済的問題：東南アジアの衛星都市（ニュータウン）の計画と開発」出席報告
布野修司
REPORT ON WORKSHOP :SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC ISSUES IN URBAN
COMMUNITIES:PLANNING ANDDEVELOPMENT OF SATELLITE TOWN(NEW TOWNS) IN SOUTHEAST
ASIA(25-27 JUNE 1996): INDONESIAN INSTITUTE OF SCIENCES:THE SOCIAL SCIENCES AND
HUMANITIES:PROGRAM OF SOUTHEAST ASIAN STUDIES
SHUJI FUNO
１９９６年６月２３日～３０日、上記国際会議に出席のため、インドネシア科学院（ＬＩＰＩ）を訪問し、THE
SELF-CONTAINED URBAN COMMUNITIES BASED ON THE ECOLOGICAL BALANCE IN THE REGIONというPAPERを発表するとともに、今後の研究計画等について意見交換を行った。その概要は以下の通りである。
Ⅰ ワークショップの評価
１ 東南アジア都市研究にとって、インドネシアＬＩＰＩがワークショップを開催した意義は大きいと思う。これまでのインドネシア都市研究は、専ら、オランダにおいて展開されてきた。その中心人物が今回参加のＤＲ．ＮＡＳである。その成果は、"THE INDONESIAN CITY STUDIES IN URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND
PLANNING", FORIS PUBLICATIONS DORDRECHT-HOLLAND/CINNAMINSON/U.S.A. ,1986 および、ISSUES IN URBAN DEVELOPMENT CASE STUDIES FROM INDONESIA”,Edited by Peter J.M.Nas,Research school CNWS, Leiden The
Netherlands, 1995に示されている。それを越える新たな研究が展開できるかどうかが、今後のＬＩＰＩへの期待である。
２ 日本の東南アジア都市研究は、今回のように政策提言、実践的都市計画をも射程に入れた分野については、極めて不十分であると思っていたが、今回、ＬＩＰＩを中心とする展開に大きな可能性があると思われた。
３ 今回招致のメンバーは、ＤＲ．ＮＡＳおよびＤＪＯＫＯ ＳＵＪＡＲＴＯ（バンドン工科大学）以外知らなかったのであるが、ＬＩＰＩのネットワークのなかで、それなりのメンバーが集められたように思えた（布野を除いて）。少なくとも、参加者のインフォーマルな議論の上では、ある共通の土俵が確認できた（義務的に参加して、熱意がないという参加者はいなかった）。
４ プログラムについては手探りの面が多かったけれど、運営に違和感はなかった。一般のオーディアンス（大半はＬＩＰＩ研究者）の積極性には正直驚いた。議論の水準は低くない。というより、布野の力量不足を痛感させられる場面が多かった。
５ 二度のフィールド・トリップ、タウフィク・アブドゥラ邸でのフェアウエル・パーティなど充分なもてなしに感謝することのみ多く、少なくとも個人ベース（二者関係）では参加者の間に強力なネットワークが形成されたと思う。
Ⅱ ＬＩＰＩの東南アジアプログラムについて
１ 都市研究の分野に関して、強力に研究を展開して欲しい。ＬＩＰＩがひとつのセンターであるべきだと思う。
２ しかし、研究はインドネシアに関して集中すべきである、というフレームがインドネシアにあることが了解された。そのフレームをまず、東南アジアに拡大するために、ＬＩＰＩに対する外部の援助が必要であるように思われた。ＪＰのみならず、京大東南アジア研究センター、文部省、建設省など、様々な機関でサポートできる可能性があるように思った。
３ ＬＩＰＩ内部の問題は不明である。都市研究分野では、工学系分野との関係が深く、今回の東南アジア都市研究グループがエンジニア部門とどういう関係をもっているのか、判断しかねた。しかし、先のＤＪＯＫＯ ＳＵＪＡＲＴＯ氏や、ＤＲ． ＳＵＷＡＴＴＡＮＡ ＴＨＡＤＡＮＩＴＩ氏の参加をみると（布野の専門分野に対応する研究者が選ばれている）、その人選はそう偏っているとは思えなかった。
４ ＬＩＰＩの研究費の獲得戦略上の日本、ＪＰ、トヨタ財団等々の位置づけは、結局、よく理解できなかった。
５ 個人的にはあらゆるネットワークを通じてＬＩＰＩの活動を支援できればと思った。
Ⅲ 国際交流基金ジャカルタ日本文化センターの活動について
１ アシアセンターの活動について全く認識しておらず、その活動の意義にまず、眼を開かされた。
２ 文化交流（？）のみに限定されるのではなく、今回のようなワークショップへの援助は、極めて意義深く、大いに期待したい（今回のモデルニスモ・アジア展はカタログだけで見ていません。昨年のアジア演劇祭ＢＥＳＥＴＯ演劇祭には、シンポジウム（グローブ座）にパネラーとして参加したことを思いだしました）。
３ 都市研究、特にニュータウンをテーマにする場合、日本の開発援助との関係が問題になる。もっと有機的に連携をとれないか、と率直に思う。正直に言って、額が違う。日本でも同じであるが、同じ支援、援助をしていても、お互いに連絡がなく、その趣旨が食い違っているとすれば、混乱を引き起こすことがある。全く同じ時期に、インドネシア大学で「持続可能な都市開発」に関する大きなシンポジウム（オーストラリアが強力支援：メルボルン大学との大学間交流）が開かれたことは、日本から住宅省に派遣されているエキスパートからの情報で知った。今回ＵＩからの参加者がなかったのは、このシンポジウムのせいかもしれない。
Ⅳ 東南アジア都市研究の展開について
１ 先進諸国（宗主国）でなく是非ＬＩＰＩがセンターになって欲しい。
２ 日本人研究者の都市研究成果を以下のマトリックスによって整理した上で、プログラムを立てたい。
布野は、都市コミュニティレヴェルのインテンシブな調査を基にした比較研究に興味がある（◎）。
ＤＲ．ＮＡＳは、ジャカルタに集中したい、広げる意思はないとのこと（●）。フランスのグループは、ハノイ、プノンペンなどに蓄積がある（○）。但し、ニュータウンの経験はない。
バンコク、マニラ、シンガポールについては、今回の参加者が既にカヴァーしつつある。それに、布野（Ｊ．シラス）のネットワークを加えることができる。
────────┬───────────────────────────
CITIES(CAPITALS)│JAK MAN
BANG KUALA SINGA HANOI PENON
YANGON :GLOBAL
────────┼───────────────────────────
STATE-LEVEL │ ● ○ ○
│
CITY AS A WHOLE│ ● ○ ○
│
NEW TOWNS │ ● × × ×
│
URBAN COMMUNITY│●◎ ◎ ◎ ○ ○
NEIGHBOURHOOD │
UNITS │
│
DWELLING UNITS │ ● ○ ○
HOUSE-LEVEL │
────────┴───────────────────────────
Ⅴ 日程概要
●６月２３日 GA783関空（13:05）→デンパサール（18:20）→ジャカルタ（20:45） DR.
HENNY WARSILAH WIDODO女史（ワークショップ事務局スタッフ）他、PROGRAM OF
SOUTHEAST ASIAN STUDIESのスタッフ二人、運転手の４人に出迎えられる。宿舎、KEBAYORAN
INNに到着（22:00過）。オランダ・ライデン大学 DR.
P.J.M. NAS（ワークショップ参加者 インドネシア都市研究の第一人者 今回の外国人参加者の内唯一名前を知っていた学者 "THE INDONESIAN CITY STUDIES IN URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND
PLANNING", FORIS PUBLICATIONS DORDRECHT-HOLLAND/CINNAMINSON/U.S.A. ,1986の編者）に会って挨拶。国際交流基金ジャカルタ日本文化センター高畑律子氏と電話連絡。
●６月２４日 9:30 国際交流基金ジャカルタ日本文化センター、西田郁夫所長と会見。ジャパン・ファンデーションの活動、および今回のワークショップのバックグラウンドについて説明を受ける。
11:00ｰ13:30 LIPIにて、ワークショップ打ち合わせ。RUSYDI SYAHRA,
PhD.(SENIOR RESEACHER)（ワークショップ事務局長 東南アジア研究グループ）、LIPI副所長、HENNY、JOKO SUKAMTO（都市プランナー DP3KK クマヨラン・ニュー・タウン開発局 二日目のエクスカーションのスケジュール調整）、布野、高畑：LIPIにて昼食（パダン弁当）。
14:00ｰ19:00 布野 プレゼンテーションの準備
19:00 西田、高畑、稲見（国際交流基金ジャカルタ日本文化センター：ロンボク・マタラム大学に留学経験あり。布野研究室のロンボク調査について情報交換）、布野会食
●６月２５日 ワークショップ第Ⅰ日
8:30- 9:00 REGISTRATION ホテル・ロビーにて参加者顔合わせ。DR. NAS教授より、新刊”ISSUES IN URBAN DEVELOPMENT
CASE STUDIES FROM INDONESIA”,Edited by Peter
J.M.Nas,Research school CNWS, Leiden The Netherlands, 1995を頂く。1986年の前著と合わせて日本で翻訳したらどうか、と思う。
9:30-10:15 OPENING CEREMONY 挨拶
DR. H.SOFJAN
TSAURI（LIPI所長）
IR. AKBAR TANJUNG（住宅大臣）ーーー前日は、「持続可能な都市開発に関するシンポジウム」（２４日ー２５日）（於：インドネシア大学）に出席：メルボルン大学とインドネシア大学の共同研究をオーストラリア政府が援助：情報収集の要。
10:30ｰ11:15 基調講演 "URBAN DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY FOR DEVELOPING COUNTRIES" IR. HINDRO T. SOEMADJAN（クマヨラン・ニュー・タウン開発局局長 建築家 二日目のサイト・ヴィジットでも説明を聞く。二日目のパーティーのホスト）
・・・発展途上国の都市問題を概観した後、インドネシアの都市開発計画の歴史と現況を紹介
11:15-13:00 ＳＥＳＳＩＯＮ Ｉ
SOCIAL-ECONOMIC PROBLEMS IN URBAN COMMUNITY
CHAIR: DR. RALDI HENDRO KOESTOER
１ DR. P.J.M. NAS（オランダ社会科学部 社会文化研究所）,
"TOWARDS SUSTAINNABLE CITIES:URBAN COMMUNITY AND ENVIRONMENT IN THE THIRD
WORLD"
・・・アーバン・ファンダメンタルズ、環境基盤、持続可能性、都市貧困、環境容量、都市メタボリズム、都市緑化、大気汚染、水質汚染、廃棄物問題、都市環境管理等をめぐる総括論文。ワークショップ全体のリーダー。
２ DR. ESTER DELA CRUZ女史（フィリピン大学社会学部）, "URBAN PLANNING IN THE PHILIPPINES"
・・・ペーパーの準備無し。フィリピンの都市開発の概況を述べる。
３ DR. SUWATTANA THADANITI女史（チュラロンコン大学建築学部都市地域計画 メルボルン大学修士 クラコウ技術大学博士）, "URBAN PROBLEMS OF BANGKOK AND DEVEROPMENT OF NEW TOWNS"
・・・バンコクの都市問題とニュータウン開発について丁寧に紹介
14:00-17:00
ＳＥＳＳＩＯＮ Ⅱ
URBAN CULTURE IN NEW TOWNS
CHAIR: DR. A.M.
SHOHIBUL HIKAM
１ DR. IRWAN ABDULLAH（ガジャマダ大学人口研究センター アムステルダム大学博士 都市人類学）, "URBAN SPACE, CONSUMER CULTURE, AND THE PRODUCTION OF
LOCALITY"
・・・インドネシア気鋭（三〇代前半？）の都市人類学者。ジャカルタの新しい都市消費文化の分析を試みる。
２ MS. YULIANTI PARANI（画家）,
"THE ARTS IN JAKARTA URBAN DEVELOPMENT"
・・・ジャカルタにおける美術運動の流れを紹介。
３ DR. TREVOR HOGAN（ラ・トロウブ大学 社会学・人類学科 社会思想史）,
"MISPLACED PLANS:FROM GARDEN CITIES TO NEW TOWNS IN BRITAIN AND ITS
ANTIPODES IN MODERNITY"
・・・1957年生まれの理論家。ニュータウンの思想とその系譜を総括。残念ながら時間足らず。アブストラクトのみ。ワークショップ参加者のなかで理論的中心。
18:00ｰ21:00 会食・情報交換（NAS HOGAN VICTOR IRWAN FUNO ブロックＭ）
●６月２６日 ワークショップ第Ⅱ日
9:30ｰ11:15 ＳＥＳＳＩＯＮ Ⅲ
CITTY PLANNING IN SOUTHEAST ASIA
CHAIR: DR.
CHARLES GOLDBLUM
１ DR. SHUJI FUNO（京都大学 地域生活空間計画）, "THE
SELF-CONTAINED URBAN COMMUNITIES BASED ON THE ECOLOGICAL BALANCE IN THE
REGION"
・・・阪神淡路大震災の教訓、日本のニュータウンの総括をもとに、東南アジアのリセツルメント計画、および都市コミュニティのモデルとしてのカンポンの特質について論ずる。
２
PROFESSOR DJOKO SUJARTO（バンドン工科大学 都市計画 以前から知り合いの研究者）, "PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS OF INDONESIAN NEW TOWN
DEVELOPMENT"
・・・インドネシアのニュータウン開発の歴史を丁寧に総括。
11:15ｰ13:00 CHAIR:
PROFESSOR DJOKO SUJARTO
１ VICTOR SAVAGE（国立シンガポール大学 東南アジア研究計画部長 美術・社会科学部副部長）, Ph. D,"PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT OF NEW TOWNS:COMMENTARY ON
NEW TOWNS IN SINGAPORE"
・・・シンガポールの都市開発についてユーモアを交えて詳説。時間をはるかにオーバーする大演説。ワークショップ参加者ＮＯ．１のエンターテイナー
２ DR.
CHARLES GOLDBLUM（パリ第八大学 都市理論研究室 HENNYの先生）,"URBAN GOVERNANCE OF SINGAPORE: A PLANNING MODEL FOR OTHER
SOUTHEAST ASIAN CITIES?"
・・・VICTOR SAVAGE の大演説を補足。
３ DR.
AGUSBUDI PURNOMO（トリサクティ大学 研究所 環境計画 新潟大学博士（樋口忠彦：ランドスケープ・デザイン））,"EDUCATION AND PLANNING IN THE FACE OF POLITICAL POWER"
・・・計画プロセスと政治力学について計画理論の必要性を展開。
14:00 LIPI発→KOTA BARU BANDAR KEMAYORAN(DP3KK)
14:40ｰ15:30 IR. HINDRO T. SOEMADJAN（クマヨラン・ニュー・タウン開発局局長） スライド説明
LIPI(RUSYDI, HENNY ETC)による”NEW TOWN AND COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT: THE CASE OF KEMAYORAN, JAKARTA”配布。好レポート。
15:30-18:00 FIELD TRIP I
・・・カンポン居住者をリプレイスしないでローコスト住宅を供給した地区に参加者一同興味を持つ。布野は二度目の見学であったけれど、思った以上に活発に空間が使われているのに感激。
18:00ｰ19:30 パーティー
・・・カンポンの子どもたちの民族舞踊に盛り上がる。
VICTOR プロ級のカラオケの腕前披露。全員、ダンドゥットのリズムに合わせて踊（らされ）る。最高のもてなしに、参加者一同打ち解ける。
21:00 ホテル着
●６月２７日 ワークショップ第Ⅲ日
8:30 ホテル発→LIPI
9:30ｰ14:00 FIELD TRIP II
LIPPO
CIKARANG-BEKASI
・・・ジャカルタ東近郊の郊外型ニュータウン視察。LIPPO BANK グループはいくつかニュータウン開発を手がけつつある。
住友商事と韓国・現代の投資：両国の工場が立ち並ぶ。「これは日本のサテライトタウンか」という野次が布野に向かって飛ぶ。
14:00ｰ14:30 LUNCH
14:30-17:00
総括討論
・・・会議の印象、今後の研究計画について意見を述べる。研究フォーマット、研究方法、主要テーマなどについて議論。
・ニュータウンの分類、タイポロジーが必要ではないか（HOGAN）
民間開発のものと政府主導のものとはわけるべきではないのか（CHARLES）
・他のアセアンの首都、ハノイ、ヤンゴン、プノンペンも含めるべきではないか（VICTOR FUNO）
・各都市について、都市全体レヴェル、ニュータウンレヴェル、コミュニティ・レヴェル、住宅レヴェルを分けて作業する必要があるのではないか。
・様々なアプローチをとり（EMPIRICAL THEORETICAL ETHICAL）、議論を深める（HOGAN）
・テーマ：
土地取得のプロセスとインパクト、国家と民間の役割、
都市管理の利害対立
都市形態と都市イメージ
都市理論 都市象徴と政治空間
・・・・・・・・・・・・
閉会挨拶 DR. HILMAN ADIL(HEAD OF PMB-LIPI)
□高畑さんＪＰを代表して挨拶
19:00-21:00 DINNER AT PROFESSOR TAUFIK ABDULLAH RESIDENCE
タウフィック邸でパーティー 布野、高畑
・・・色々な出し物も出て盛り上がる。VICTOR活躍
22:00- FAREWELL PARTY (NAS CHARLES VICTOR HOGAN
IRWAN FUNO)
●６月２８日 ワークショップ参加者帰国
9:00-10:00
LIPI 図書室閲覧コピー
10:00ｰ12:00 LIPIとＪＰとの今後の打ち合わせ
PROFESSOR TAUFIK ABDULLAH，RUSYDI SYAHRA, PhD.DR., HENNY WARSILAH WIDODO他 東南アジア研究スタッフ計7人 布野 高畑
・・・布野は、個人的な感想をのべ、２９日深夜参加者同士で話し合ったことをも踏まえて研究の展開方向について以下のメモを用いて意見をいう。また、個人で思いつく範囲のアドヴァイスを行う。
□MAJOR ISSUES
1 CITY FORM AND POLITICAL ECONOMICAL AND SOCIAL
STRUCTURE
2 SPACE PRODUCTION SYSTEM --- MECHANISM SPACE
ALLOCATION
3 URBAN FORM IMAGINED AND REALITIES
PROCESS OF REALIZATION OF
IDEAS OF NEW TOWN
PROCESS OF LOCALIZATION
OF NT PHILOSOPHY
4 THE PHASES OF SEGREGATION
5
6
□LIST OF WORKS ON THE PREMISE OF THE STUDY
1 GENERAL DISCRIPTION
WHAT IS NEW TOWN? IN THE
ERA OF GLOBALIZATION
HISTORY OF NT(IDEAL
CITY)
FROM GARDEN CITY TO NT
IN THE THIRD WORLD
2 CLASSIFICATION OF CITIES
TYPOLOGY OF NT
3 REVIEW OF URBAN PLANNING THEORY
4 LITERATURAL STUDY...COLLECTION OF HISTORICAL
MATERIALS
5 FRAMEWORK OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT
URBAN PLANNING POLICIES
URBAN PLANNING
ORGANIZATION
6
□TARGET AREA FOR STUDY
WHO CAN COVER? WHAT AREA IS EACH RESEACHER INTERESTED IN?
────────┬───────────────────────────
CITIES(CAPITALS)│JAK MAN
BANG KUALA SINGA HANOI PENON
YANGON :GLOBAL
────────┼───────────────────────────
STATE-LEVEL │
│
CITY AS A WHOLE│
│
NEW TOWNS │ × × ×
│
URBAN COMMUNITY│
NEIGHBOURHOOD │
UNITS │
│
DWELLING UNITS │
HOUSE-LEVEL │
────────┴───────────────────────────
DR. NAS INSISTS AT LEAST TWO
RESEARCHERS(ONE IS FOREIGNER) COVER ONE CITY ON ALL LEVELS.
DR. IRWAN SAYS FOUR
RESEARCHER PER ONE CITY WHO STUDY EACH LEVEL ARE NEEDED.
13:00ｰ14:00 ＪＦにて西田所長へ報告・挨拶
18:30- JICA EXPERT 金谷（旧知 ５月着任）、北村（大学後輩）両氏（住宅省派遣 MENPERA）と会食・情報交換 布野 高畑
●６月２９日 バンテン視察
布野 高畑
・・・Ｊ．シラス教授（スラバヤ工科大学）より”KAMPUNG SURABAYA”郵送入手（この間、計三度の電話を頂いた）
11:00 ホテル発
13:00 DRS. HALWANY宅で沢山の資料を頂く（バドゥイ調査の可能性が開けて大収穫）
13:00ｰ17:00 バンテン遺跡 美術館 モスク 要塞等視察。HAWANY先生の息子さんに案内していただく。
20:30 スカルノ・ハッタ空港
20:40CENKARENG→DENPASAR（3:30）→
関空着 ６月３０日 10:15
