Assessing Cumulative - webapps.itc.utwente.nl · (Banguntapan), Piyungan, Wonosari, Rongkop and Sadeng a strategic area of economic growth in DIY Province includes one corridor which

Assessing Cumulative

Environmental Sensitivity and

Cumulative Impact in Strategic

Environmental Assessment (SEA)

(Case Study :Yogyakarta-Sadeng

Corridor Indonesia)

Tria Yuliati

Februari, 2015

SUPERVISORS:

Dr. Johannes Flacke

Drs. J.M. Looijen

Assessing Cumulative

Environmental Sensitivity and

Cumulative Impact in Strategic

Environmental Assessment (SEA)

(Case Study :Yogyakarta-Sadeng

Corridor, Indonesia)

TRIA YULIATI

Enschede, The Netherlands, February, 2015

Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation of the University of Twente in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Geo-information Science and Earth Observation.

Specialization: Urban Planning and Management

SUPERVISORS:

Dr. Johannes Flacke

Drs. J.M. Looijen

THESIS ASSESSMENT BOARD:

Prof. dr. A. van der Veen (Chairman, ITC)

Dr. Karen.S. Buchanan (External Examiner, Wageningen University)

DISCLAIMER

This document describes work undertaken as part of a programme of research at the Faculty of Geo-Information

Science and Earth Observation of the University of Twente. All views and opinions expressed therein remain the

sole responsibility of the author, and do not necessarily represent those of the Faculty.

i

ABSTRACT

Cumulative Impacts (CI) derived from several development such as industrial, housing, commercial, road)

then having a combined of environmental problems (e.g. air pollution, groundwater pollution, biodiversity

fragmentation and so on). Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) is able to predict likely cumulative

impact on environment as a result of several development being given under the plan. According to the

Law of Environmental Management and Protection in Indonesia, SEA is mandatory to integrate in the

spatial plan. However, the assessment mostly conducted qualitatively without a clear spatial restrictions.

Therefore, the assessment are not useful and only to fulfil its obligations under the law.

Cumulative impact can be predicted by obtaining an understanding of the existing state of the

environmental sensitivity with respect to the aspects that may be affected by the plan. Environmental

sensitivity assessment is useful in identify the most sensitive areas where the accumulation of environmental

problems occur in one place by generating the Cumulative Environmental Sensitivity (CES) index map.

The result can give recommendation for planner such as the sensitive /protected areas of the future

development plan activities.

The research aims to assess CES and CI in the implementation of SEA for Spatial Planning. The

characteristic of environmental sensitivity was obtained by selecting environmental resources and establish

the indicators and criteria to measure the sensitivity. The indicators obtained from the experts judgement

and supported with the regulation and previous study. The experts also play a role in providing input to the

classification of environmental sensitivity index (e.g. non-sensitive, low, medium and high sensitivity).

The research further emphasize on the case study in Yogyakarta-Sadeng corridor, concerning the

application of Uniform Analysis Zones (UAZ) using vector data sets for defining and mapping of CES and

CI, which a challenges that many previous study performs using raster data sets. All environmental

indicators were reclassified into same unit and combined using GIS “UNION” commands to derive

cumulative index of environment sensitivity and environment impact. A specific cumulative index is

typically a mathematical expression of map algebra, hence, “addition” and “multiplication” as well as “rule

based classification” were applied to see the different results among them. It is found that "addition" and

"rule based" approach are most reliable to describe cumulative. However, the application of the rule-based

can be less accurate because it includes a normative approach.

Finally, the most sensitive areas as well as the most impacted areas were explained into sub-district

administrative units. In general, the use of spatial data and techniques allows relevant environmental and

planning data to be adjusted at different scales. This is particularly relevant in UAZ approach to generate

CES and CI spatially and useful for improving the implementation of SEA in spatial planning in Indonesia

which were mostly only assessed qualitatively.

Keywords: Cumulative Environment Sensitivity (CES), Cumulative Impact (CI), Strategic Environmental,

Assessment (SEA), Uniform Analysis Zone (UAZ), GIS overlay, Spatial Planning.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Bismillahirrahmanirrahim, all praise to Allah swt, the Most Gracious and the Most Merciful for all the

blessings from this journey.

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisors: Dr. Johannes Flacke and Drs. J.M Looijen for their assistance, kindness and patience in supervising me until the end of my study. It is with their invaluable guidance, comments and supports that I am now able to complete my research. My sincere thanks to Mr. Emile Dopheide for his advices on the problems that were emerged during my study at ITC, and Student Affairs officers for their kind assistance. Thanks to all ITC staffs, particularly UPM staffs that have been teaching and being so supportive in academic learning. I thank Nuffic NESO Indonesia for the funding support during my study in ITC, The Netherlands. Thank you so much for the opportunity.

I thank my Indonesian fellow students in The Netherlands for the friendship and togetherness. Thank you

for making me a new “home”. I am more than grateful to have a new family with all of you. Thanks to all

ITC students especially my classmates in UPM for making my journey full of learning and happiness

Finally, I dedicate this hard work, patience, and endurance to my parents, my husband and my beloved son. I am very much grateful for their love, prayer and support all through my life. Thank you for supporting me to always passion no matter how hard the problems could be.

ERRATA SHEET

Even number pages were missing.

Pages Reads Correction Explanation

3 a strategic area of economic growth in DIY Province includes one corridor

which connects Yogyakarta urban area (Banguntapan), Piyungan, Wonosari,

Rongkop and Sadeng

a strategic area of economic growth in DIY Province includes one corridor

which connects Yogyakarta urban area (Banguntapan), Piyungan, Wonosari,

Rongkop and Coast Sadeng (in Girisubo sub district)

12 List of issues and preliminary

environmental resaearch

List of issues and preliminary

environmental resources

18 Table 7

Mapping : water access Result : water supply

Table 7

Mapping : water access Result : water access

The result should be water

access sensitivity index map

18 Table 7

Mapping: air pollution Result: water supply

Table 7

Mapping: air pollution Result: air pollution

The result should be air

pollution index map

18 The score withing ranges of 1-4 were

classified as table below.

The scoring system were addopted from

“risk-based analysis” (Glasson, Therivel, & Chadwick, 2013). The score withing

ranges of 1-4 were classified as table below.

27 Meanwhile, the criteria were explained in order to express the degree of sensitivity

The indicator were explained in order to express the degree of sensitivity

28 4.2.1 Karst Ecosystem

Karst ecosystem from Semanu to Sadeng

4.2.1 Karst Ecosystem

Karst ecosystem from Semanu to Sadeng coast area in Girisubo district.

28 Those selected indicators and

classification of environmental sensitive criteria were obtained by...

Those selected icriteria and indicators of

environmental sensitivity were obtained by

28 If the sensitive criteria are not available through.....

If the indicator are not available through.....

28 According to experts opinion, all the

sensitivity criteria..

According to experts opinion, the

indicators of environmental sensitivity..

35 Table 17 Water coverage

Served : Non sensitive

Unserved : High sensitivity

Depth <7 m : Non sensitive

7-15 m : Low

15-25 m: Medium

Non Aquifer: High

Table 17 Water pipe coverage area and

groundwater depth: Unserved & Non Aquifer, Unserved

&15-25 m : High sensitivity

Unserved & 7-15 m, Unserved &

<7m: Medium sensitivity Served & 15-25 m, Served & Non

Aquifer: Low sensitivity

Served & < 7m, Served & 7-15 m :

Non sensitive

42 Figure 18, Map a) Figure 18, Map c)

Figure 18 A map of a) CES for

protection “Addition” should be placed bellow c)

CES for protection “Rule Based”, and vice versa.

42 Figure 18, Map c) Figure 18, Map a)

46 There are two tables in this page. It should be only one table. The first table should be

deleted.

48 The percentage of low scores in

multiplication is quite high compared to the percentage of low scores in addition

and rule based technique (Figure 20 and 21)

The percentage of low scores in

multiplication is quite high compared to the percentage of low scores in addition

and rule based techniques (Figure 20)

48 The composite environmental sensitivity

map were combined both of environment sensitivity…

The composite environmental sensitivity

map were combined both of environmental sensitivity…

50 Table 23 shows that 18% of total sub-

district area….

Table 24 shows that 18% of total sub-

district area….

54 However, other criteria of the

biodiversity sensitive area have been

However, other criteria of biodiversity

sensitive area have been added by author

Pages Reads Correction Explanation

added by author based on expert consultation (See chapter 4.1.2.8)

based on expert consultation (See chapter 4.2.2)

55 Meanwhile, according to the air pollution index (see. Chapter 4.3.7)

Meanwhile, according to the air pollution index (see. Chapter 4.2.7)

59 Table 32.

Impact magnitude: Medium

Table 32.

Impact magnitude: Moderate

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................................................1

1.1 Background............................................................................................................................................................1 1.2 Research Problems ..............................................................................................................................................1 1.3 Research Objectives and Questions................................................................................................................2 1.4 Study Area..............................................................................................................................................................3 1.5 Conceptual Framework ......................................................................................................................................4 1.6 Structure of the thesis .........................................................................................................................................4

2. Literature Review................................................................................................................................................................5 2.1 Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) for Spatial Plan ..................................................................5 2.2 SEA for Spatial Plan in Indonesia ...................................................................................................................6 2.3 Cumulative Impacts Assessment in SEA spatial plan................................................................................6 2.4 Environmental Sensitivity..................................................................................................................................7 2.5 Cumulative Environmental Sensitivity (CES) ..............................................................................................9 2.6 Summarized ........................................................................................................................................................ 10

3. Methodology..................................................................................................................................................................... 12 3.1 Research Design ................................................................................................................................................ 12 3.2 Primary and Secondary Data Collection..................................................................................................... 14 3.3 Methods used to Develop Criteria and Indicators for Environmental Sensitivity ........................ 15

3.3.1 Document Review ...................................................................................................................................... 15 3.3.2 Expert Selection .......................................................................................................................................... 16 3.3.3 Semi- Structured Interview ...................................................................................................................... 16 3.3.4 Expert Judgement....................................................................................................................................... 17

3.4 Method to generate an Environmental Sensitivity Index ...................................................................... 17 3.4.1 GIS processing ............................................................................................................................................ 17 3.4.2 Scoring and Reclassification .................................................................................................................... 18

3.5 Method to Generate Cumulative Environment Sensitivity Index Map ............................................. 19 3.5.1 Uniform Analysis Zones (UAZ) and GIS Overlay ........................................................................... 19 3.5.2 Map Algebra Combination ..................................................................................................................... 19 3.5.3 Data Classification Method for CES..................................................................................................... 20

3.6 Method to identify the likely cumulative environment impact in SEA.............................................. 22 3.7 Summarized ........................................................................................................................................................ 23

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSION .................................................................................................................... 24 4.1 Identification of criteria and indicators of environment sensitivity based on expert judgement 24

4.1.1 Identification Key Experts ....................................................................................................................... 24 4.1.2 Feedback Interview from the Experts .................................................................................................. 25 4.1.3 Discussion of Selection the Criteria and Indicators Based on Expert Judgment ..................... 27

4.2 Environmental Sensitivity Indicator Index Mapping.............................................................................. 28 4.2.1 Karst Ecosystem ......................................................................................................................................... 28 4.2.2 Biodiversity................................................................................................................................................... 30 4.2.3 Water Recharge ........................................................................................................................................... 31 4.2.4 Agriculture .................................................................................................................................................... 32 4.2.5 Groundwater Pollution ............................................................................................................................. 34 4.2.6 Water Access................................................................................................................................................ 35 4.2.7 Air Pollution................................................................................................................................................. 36 4.2.8 Soil Erosion.................................................................................................................................................. 38 4.2.9 Population..................................................................................................................................................... 39 4.2.10 Discussion of Environmental Sensitivity Index Mapping............................................................... 40

4.3 Cumulative Environmental Sensitivity (CES) ........................................................................................... 41 4.3.1 Cumulative Environmental Sensitivity (CES) for Protection......................................................... 41 4.3.2 Cumulative Environmental Sensitivity to Degradation.................................................................... 44 4.3.3 Discussion of Map Algebra Combination and Classification in CES .......................................... 47 4.3.4 Overall Environmental Sensitivity ......................................................................................................... 48

4.4 Prediction of Likely Cumulative Impacts and Conflict Zone............................................................... 50

4.4.1 Water Recharge ........................................................................................................................................... 51 4.4.2. Biodiversity ....................................................................................................................................................... 53 4.4.3 Air pollution ................................................................................................................................................. 55 4.4.4 Groundwater pollution ............................................................................................................................. 56 4.4.5 Identification of Cumulative Impact ..................................................................................................... 58 4.4.6 Discussion of Cumulative Impact Assessment .................................................................................. 60

5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION ................................................................................................. 61 5.1 Determination of Criteria and Indicators Based on Expert Judgement ............................................ 61 5.2 The Classification of Environmental Sensitivity ...................................................................................... 61 5.3 Development of Cumulative Environmental Sensitivity (CES) Index .............................................. 62 5.4 Implementation of Cumulative Impact Assessment (CIA)................................................................... 62 5.6 Research Limitations........................................................................................................................................ 62 5.7 Future Research Recommendations ............................................................................................................ 63

List of References ................................................................................................................................................................ 64 Apendix. A : Semi-Structured Interview........................................................................................................................ 67 Apendix B : Air Pollution Index in the Main Road Yogyakarta-Sadeng Corridor ........................................... 79

v

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Study Area....................................................................................................................... 3

Figure 2: conceptual framework ...................................................................................................... 4

Figure 3: Positioning SEA in the decision-making hierarchy ............................................................... 5

Figure 4: Example of Cumulative Environmental Sensitivity Map ....................................................... 9

Figure 5: Environmental Sensitivity Assessment .............................................................................. 10

Figure 6: Research Design ............................................................................................................ 13

Figure 7: Addition and Multiply operation ...................................................................................... 20

Figure 8: Map of Karst Sensitive Area ............................................................................................ 29

Figure 9. Map of Biodiversity Sensitive Area ................................................................................... 31

Figure 10: Map of Water Recharge Sensitive Area............................................................................ 32

Figure 11. Map of Agriculture Sensitive Area .................................................................................. 33

Figure 12: Map of Groundwater Pollution Sensitive Area ................................................................. 34

Figure 13: Map of Water Supply Sensitive Area ............................................................................... 36

Figure 14: Total Pollutan Index (Pij) in the main road of Yogyakarta-Sadeng corridor ......................... 37

Figure 15: Map of Air Pollution Sensitive Area................................................................................ 38

Figure 16: Map of Soil Erosion Sensitive Area ................................................................................ 39

Figure 17: Map of Population Sensitive Area ................................................................................. 40

Figure 18: Map of CES for Protection using Addition (a), Multiplication (b), Rule-Based (c) ................ 42

Figure 19: Histogram CES for protection ....................................................................................... 44

Figure 20: Map of CES for degradation using Addition (a), Multiplication (b) and Rule Based (c) ......... 45

Figure 21: Histogram of CES for degradation ................................................................................. 47

Figure 22: CES Total Index Map ................................................................................................... 49

Figure 23: Land use plan (economic activities) Yogyakarta-Sadeng Corridor 2012-2032 ....................... 51

Figure 24: Water Recharge Impact Area ......................................................................................... 53

Figure 25: Biodiversity impact map ................................................................................................ 54

Figure 26: Air Impact Map............................................................................................................ 56

Figure 27: Groundwater impact map.............................................................................................. 57

Figure 28: Cumulative Impact Map ................................................................................................ 59

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Research Objectives and Questions ..................................................................................... 2

Table 2: Environmental sensitivities in International SEA report (in Ireland) ....................................... 8

Table 3: Indicator of environmental component in EIA (in Indonesia) ................................................ 8

Table 4: Indicator of environmental impact and risk in SEA (Indonesia) .............................................. 9

Table 5 : Lists of Spatial and Non Spatial Data ................................................................................ 14

Table 6: Documents Reviewed ...................................................................................................... 15

Table 7: Digital mapping process ................................................................................................... 18

Table 8: Scoring and classification for environmental sensitivity ........................................................ 19

Table 9: CES rule based classification............................................................................................. 22

Table 10: Key Experts ................................................................................................................. 25

Table 11: Criteria, Indicators and Related Issues .............................................................................. 26

Table 12: Karst delineation ........................................................................................................... 29

Table 13: Biodiversity Classification ............................................................................................... 30

Table 14: Soil infiltration standard ................................................................................................. 32

Table 15: Agriculture classification................................................................................................. 33

Table 16: Ground water pollution standard..................................................................................... 34

Table 17: Water pipe and groundwater depth classification ............................................................... 35

Table 18: Emission Standard and Classification ............................................................................... 37

Table 19: Soil Erosion Classification .............................................................................................. 38

Table 20: Population standard and classification .............................................................................. 39

Table 21: CES classes for protection in sub-district ......................................................................... 43

Table 22: CES classes for degradation in sub-district ....................................................................... 46

Table 23: Application the score of “one” in addition, multiplication and rule-based......................... 48

Table 24: Total area of overall CES index in the Sub-district............................................................. 49

Table 25: Assessment of magnitude of potential impact on a water recharge area ................................ 52

Table 26: Assessment of potential conflict zone in the water recharge area ......................................... 52

Table 27: Assessment of potential conflict zone on biodiversity ........................................................ 53

Table 28: Assessment of magnitude of potential impact on a biodiversity ........................................... 54

Table 29: Assessment of magnitude of potential impact on air pollution ............................................ 55

Table 30: Assessment of magnitude of potential impact on groundwater pollution .............................. 57

Table 31: Impact on Environmental Resources ............................................................................... 58

Table 32: Impact area in sub-district level ....................................................................................... 59

v ii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

CES : Cumulative Environmental Sensitivity

CI : Cumulative Impact

CIA : Cumulative Impact Assessment

SEA : Strategic Environmental Assessment

EIA : Environmental Impact Assessment

PPP : Policy, Plan, Program

D.I Y : Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta (Yogyakarta Special Region)

GIS : Geographic Information System

UAZ : Uniform Analysis Zone

ASSESSING CUMULATIVE ENVIRONMENT SENSITIVITY AND CUMULATIVE IMPACT IN STRATEGIC ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (SEA)

(CASE STUDY: YOGYAKARTA-SADENG CORRIDOR)

1

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background Most urban areas, especially in developing countries, are characterized by a high population density. As a result, the

combination of high impact and exposure causes a higher degree of environmental problems. Many environmental

problems such as increasing air pollution, groundwater pollution, soil erosion, or limited open space add up to

cumulative impacts of human activities (Cooper, 2004). “Cumulative impact arises, for instance, where several

developments each have insignificant effects, but together have a significant effect; or where several individual effects

of the plan (e.g. noise, dust and visual) have a combined effect” (OPDM, 2005 p.78).

Assessment of cumulative impact is required by the European Community (EC) Directives as well as by the

Environmental Law of Indonesia Republic. The assessment is important to address at project level in

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and at planning level in Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA)

(CEC, 2001 ; Ministry of Environment Republic Indonesia, 2011). Therefore, SEA has the opportunity to address

cumulative impacts and avoid the adverse environmental impacts of multiple plan activities, because the scope of

the assessment is broader than EIA. In order to identify the likely environmental impact of the plan activities and

describe the occurrence of cumulative impact, it is necessary to understand the existing state of environment

(environmental sensitivity baseline). The aim is to identify environmental sensitive area with respect to the aspects

that may be affected by the plan. (Scott and Marsden, 2003; OECD, 2006).

SEA for spatial plan have the objective to avoid or minimize the adverse impacts from the beginning before

designated the plan activities (Cooper, 2004). Such as Warner (1996) who analysed several environmental indicators

to develop planning alternatives through land suitability assessment. Kuenzli et al. (2009) followed the assessment

with the evaluation of planning alternatives to assess the trade off in terms of social, economy and environmental

aspect to identify the plan alternatives which have impacts. The limitation occurs in cumulative impact assessment

for evaluating plan alternatives that in practices is more often conducted qualitatively without clear spatial

boundaries. The result mostly has limitation to show the accumulation of each impact spatially as well as to identify

areas where the impact will be higher if the plan activities will be implemented.

In order to identify the cumulative impact, it is essential to identify the environment state that indicates sensitive

areas (OPDM, 2005). Thus, the environmental sensitive area were used to facilitate the identification of the impacts

of the proposed plan. In practice, this approach has been analysed by Del Campo (2008) and Vukicevic and

Nedovic-Budic (2012) to develop Cumulative Environmental Sensitivity (CES) index map and indicate the

potential impacts. In order to better understand the cumulative environmental sensitivity and evaluate cumulative

impact spatially, different methods and techniques were explored in this research with the case study in Yogyakarta-

Sadeng corridor spatial plan.

1.2 Research Problems According to the Spatial Plan of Yogyakarta Province, Yogyakarta –Sadeng Corridor is designated as strategic area

for economic development. However, the Yogyakarta-Sadeng Corridor area mainly consists of agriculturally

productive areas, karst ecosystems and forest protected areas (DIY Planning Agency, 2010). Due to economic

development pressure as a trigger of urbanisation, this area shows a high environmental sensitivity. Consequently,


(CAS E STUDY: YOGYAKA RTA-SA DE NG CO RRIDOR)

environmental sensitive areas need to be identified and to be considered in the Yogyakarta –Sadeng Corridor

spatial plan in order to recognize the likely cumulative impact on the environment of the proposed plan.

SEA in Indonesia is mandatory to be integrated with a spatial plan (Ministry of Environment Republic of

Indonesia, 2011). Therefore, SEA should be integrated in Yogyakarta-Sadeng corridor spatial plan. However, the

planning process continued without SEA, which means this plan did also not consider the cumulative impact.

Further, there is still a limitation in addressing cumulative impacts of SEA implementation in Indonesia. The

implementation is often done using a qualitative assessment (e.g. matrix-based approach) without clear spatial

indications. Thus, mapping environmental sensitivity is useful in identifying the likely impact on the environment

of the proposed plan. Several maps can be combined to calculate cumulative environment sensitivity (CES) index

and cumulative impact (CI) spatially. However, such assessments have not been established yet in SEA

implementation in Indonesia. The indicators to measure environmental sensitivity are still not fully defined in the

regulation. Therefore, involvement of experts has an important role in developing criteria and indicators to

measure the environmental sensitivity.

Furthermore, in the international practices of SEA, there are a few best practices in identifying CES as well as CI.

The particular methods still have limitations and need to be developed. Multi criteria analysis (MCA) using Weight

Linear Combination (WLC) is the most method used in the SEA practices (Vukicevic and Nedovic-Budic, 2012).

However, WLC is commonly normalise the total sensitivity of a given area when dividing the total value by the

number of issues which occurs at that given location by giving weighted for each factor (Antunes, Santos and

Jordão, 2001). Consequently, the high sensitivity score can be compensated by a low one if the factor considered

as not important. This approach is lose the emphasis of the cumulative nature of sensitivity and impact that overlap

in a region. Hence, a methodology for the identification of cumulative environmental sensitivity and cumulative

impact still needs to be developed.

1.3 Research Objectives and Questions To address the research problem, the main aim of this research is “To assess cumulative environmental sensitivity

and to indicate the likely cumulative impact on the environment in the case of Yogyakarta-Sadeng Corridor Spatial

Plan. This aim will be achieved through the following objectives and questions (Table 1):

Table 1: Research Objectives and Questions

OBJECTIVE RESEARCH QUESTION

1 To identify the criteria and

indicators of environmental

sensitivity based on expert's

judgment

Who are the key experts to be involved in this research?

What are the sensitive environmental resources to be

considered?

What are the criteria and indicators and to measure the

sensitivity of each environment resources?

2 To map and classify the

environmental sensitivity index What are the classification to be used for environmental

sensitivity index?

Where is the areas that are considered as a high

environmental sensitivity of each resource?

3 To accomplish a cumulative

environmental sensitivity index

map that indicates the

environmental sensitive area in

Yogyakarta-Sadeng Corridor.

How to combine the different environmental sensitivity

indicators?

Where is the locations that have a high cumulative

environmental sensitivity and need more attention in the

spatial plan?

4 To compare the sensitive areas with

the proposed land use plan if there

is a likely cumulative impact on the

environment

Are there any potential cumulative impact of the proposed

plan?

Where is the locations that have a high cumulative impact?



3

1.4 Study Area

The research took place in Yogyakarta – Sadeng Corridor, D.I Yogyakarta (DIY) Province, Indonesia. Yogyakarta-

Sadeng Corridor is around 33.680,37 hectares which is divided into 10 sub-district according to administration

unit. This region includes Banguntapan Sub-District (in Bantul District), Berbah Sub-District (in Sleman District)

and Piyungan, Patuk, Playen, Wonosari, Semanu, Ponjong, Rongkop, Girisubo Sub-District (in Gunungkidul

District) (D.I.Y Public Works and Residential Agency, 2013).

According to Yogyakarta Province Regulation No. 2 of 2010 about Spatial Planning of Yogyakarta Province (DIY)

Article 98, a strategic area of economic growth in DIY Province includes one corridor which connects Yogyakarta

urban area (Banguntapan), Piyungan, Wonosari, Rongkop and Sadeng. Thus, the road corridors linking those areas

have been established by the Local Government in Yogyakarta as a strategic area of economic growth. Therefore

Spatial Plan for Yogyakarta-Sadeng Corridor is being prepared to identify potential allocation of economic

development (DIY Planning Agency, 2010).

In terms of demographic statistics, the total population in Yogyakarta-Sadeng Corridor is 362.975 inhabitants

(D.I.Y Public Works and Residential Agency, 2013). Banguntapan Sub-district functionally is functionally included

in the Urban Area of Yogyakarta. Thus, rapid development in Yogyakarta Urban Area can foster new settlement

for Banguntapan and spread to the nearest sub-district such as Piyungan and Berbah. Other potential economic

activities along the road corridor area such as housing, industry, commercial activities and recreation exert pressure

to the environmental, because it will create a conflict of space on the surrounding geological protected area such

as karst, agriculture and forest conservation areas along the road corridors. Moreover, rapid new growth in this

region will have an impact on heavier traffic load conditions in this road corridor. The high level of congestion

can emit more pollution. Figure 1 shows the location of Yogyakarta-Sadeng Corridor as a part of D.I. Yogyakarta

province.

Figure 1: Study Area



1.5 Conceptual Framework

Figure 2: conceptual framework

The conceptual framework (Figure 2) explain the scientific concepts of the assessment of CES and CI for this

research. It describes that environmental sensitivity assessment was used to generate a CES index in order to find

the most sensitive areas. The results include the creation of a map based on a set of environmental sensitivity

indicators and criteria (e.g. water supply, air pollution, groundwater pollution, soil erosion, biodiversity and so on).

Those maps were combined into one cumulative index map to illustrate the highest and the lowest environmental

sensitivity which can be distinguished into sensitivity to protection and degradation. CES were shown as an

overlapping environmental issues in the field area which is useful to make plan alternatives. Furthermore,

environmental sensitivity was identified to assess the likely cumulative impact on environment of the proposed

plan. Since D.I.Yogyakarta province has already designated the proposed plan activities, the plan was evaluated by

developing the criteria to identify the magnitude of impact, which were based on the assessment result of

environmental sensitivity. The aim is to identify the potential conflict zones and estimate the likely cumulative

impact on environment of the proposed development plan.

1.6 Structure of the thesis

Chapter 1. Introduction : This chapter presents a general overview of the research problem, background and

justification. It also presents the research problem, objectives and questions.

Chapter 2. Literature Review : This comprises major discussions on the approach to the research of environment

sensitive, cumulative environmental sensitivity (CES) and the relationship with the Cumulative Impact (CI) in

Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) implementation.

Chapter 3: Methodology: The focus in this chapter will be on research design, the lists of primary and secondary

data, method and tools to generate environmental sensitivity index, CES index and to estimate the likely potential

impact of the proposed development plan.

Chapter 4: Results and Discussion: This chapter presents the results generating by applying methods (chapter

3). The results will be explained and discussed.

Chapter 5 : Conclusion and Recommendation: This chapter depicts conclusions based on result and discussion

and provides an understanding about the research objectives and give recommendation for future study.



5

2. Literature Review

In this chapter extensive literature were explained the general description, first about Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) for

spatial plan and the process to identify likely impacts. Second, discuss types of environmental resources and the indicators to measure

environmental sensitivity. Third, explain the description of Cumulative Environmental Sensitivity (CES). Lastly, explain GIS for

the assessment of CES index and Cumulative Impact (CI) assessment in SEA for spatial plan.

2.1 Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) for Spatial Plan

“SEA is a systematic, on-going process for evaluating, at the earliest appropriate stage of publicly accountable

decision-making, the environmental quality, and consequences, of alternative visions and development intentions

incorporated in policy, planning or programme initiatives, ensuring full integration of relevant biophysical,

economic, social and political considerations” (Partidario, 1998).

There is a hierarchy of levels in decision making comprising projects, programmes, plans and policies (figure 3).

SEA is applied in the Policy, Plan and Program (PPP) level which is more at strategic level. The assessment is more

flexible and can include a wider scenario. Meanwhile, Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is used on project

level. The assessment has well defined and prescribed specifications (OECD, 2006) .

Figure 3: Positioning SEA in the decision-making hierarchy

SEA is undertaken by predicting potential environmental impacts that could occur as a result of the proposed

plan. The aim of SEA Spatial Planning is to improve the planning and to facilitate the learning process among

relevant agencies (Sadler, 2011). The first stage of SEA is to develop an understanding of the environmental

resources (water, air, soil, etc.) that may be affected and the key measures proposed in the Plan to set a framework

for identifying and evaluating the impact of the measures on these environmental resources. This stage called as

scoping which will ensure that the authority remains focussed upon the important issues (Scott and Marsden,

2003). This is useful as a basis for impact assessment. These statements are also mentioned in the SEA Directive

that SEA can consider the cumulative impacts of more than one project or activity on the same environmental

component. To identify and address the likely environmental impacts of the PPP, this will involve:

Obtaining an understanding of the existing state of the environment (environment sensitive) with respect

to the aspects that may be affected by the plan.

Predicting how that environment is expected to change as a consequence of implementing the plan (and

its alternatives). (OECD, 2006)



It is also an obligation under the SEA Guidelines that information is provided on the relevant indicators of the

current state of the environment. The relevant indicators can be identified through discussion and consultation

with stakeholders and based on important issues in the study area (Ministry of Environment, 2011; Therivel, 2010).

Meanwhile, expert judgement is also considered in giving input for the relevant environmental sensitivity criteria

and giving a value to the criteria which called as a value judgement (Therivel, 2010). (Gonzalez, Gilmer, Foley,

Sweeney, & Fry, 2005), mention that public participation is one of the essential components of the assessment

procedure in SEA to enhance transparency and legitimacy in decision-making processes.

2.2 SEA for Spatial Plan in Indonesia

SEA for the spatial plan in Indonesia is mandatory. Spatial plans range from general plans (national, island-wide,

provincial, etc.) to detailed plans (elaborated at the scale of 1 : 10,000 until 1 : 5000). The entire planning process

involves consultations between both the executive as well as the legislative branches of the local government, and

it provides multiple opportunities for lobbying by interested stakeholders (Ministry of Environment Republic

Indonesia, 2007). A distinct feature of this entire system is that any proposed plan could be changed at nearly any

point in time, depending on negotiations between the relevant actors. Stakeholders engaged in these planning

processes would typically pay more attention to plans that define frameworks for specific sector programs (Dusik,

2010).

According to the Quality Assuranece of SEA spatial plan in Indonesia case, mostly SEA practices for spatial plan

did not estimates cumulative impacts i.e. impacts likely resulting from implementing of the entire spatial plan. Not

only lack of addressing cumulative impacts but also lack discussion in evaluating impacts of specific development

activities in the spatial plan (e.g. industrial zones, residential, new road and so on) (Ministry of Environment

Republic of Indonesia, 2012b). Most of SEA spatial plan did not analyze past trends, however it mainly focusing

on environmental existing situation (baseline). The environmental baselines were generated based on

environmental monitoring report without clear spatial indication which shows the sensitive area of development

(e.g. for the “land and forest degradation”). Also, the SEA for spatial plan does not consider cumulative

environmental sensitivy which suggests the plan alternatives (Ministry of Environment Republic Indonesia, 2012).

2.3 Cumulative Impacts Assessment in SEA spatial plan

Cumulative impacts mostly important in SEA because the spatial plan may define many different developments

arranged in parallel with each other, and with other changes happening in the area (Scott and Marsden, 2003). SEA

is able to predict future changes in the environment as a result of several developments being given under the

Policy Plan and Program (PPP) (OECD, 2006). Cumulative impacts can also derive from several individual aspects

of the PPP having a combined effect on resources (e.g. air pollution, biodiversity). Evaluating co-occurring

environmental sensitivity and environmental status as well as the linkages between these and the proposed

alternative plan, can help address cumulative impacts (OPDM, 2005).

In order to predict the likely cumulative impact, a baseline for environmental sensitivity were potential to adopt,

whereas the mapping of environmental sensitivity shows a concentration of sensitive areas, there is an increased

chance that development will be in conflict with the sensitive areas and cause likely potential impact on

environment (Halton Region Planning and Public Works Department, 2005). Vukicevic and Nedovic-Budic,

(2012) explained in their assessment that environmental sensitivity can be observed as evaluation of all

geographically environmental factors that could be affected by planned development activities. The development

pressure reflects development indicators as the main cause of possible negative environmental impacts. If the

development plan are overlapping with the highly sensitive areas, the impact magnitude will likely be predicted as

high. The results of predictions can be usefully summarised in a tabular format (sometimes called an impact



7

matrix). Further, it can be classified using grading systems of impact magnitude (e.g. affected – not affected,

increase–decrease, low - high, etc.) (CEC, 2007)

The identification of the magnitude of impact depends on the circumstances of the proposed plan and the affected

environment (EC, 2009). Impact magnitude depends to large degree on the environmental sensitivity baseline or

the condition of the existing environment. (Therivel, 2010). (Sadler, 2011) exemplified that an action can have a

high impact even if the environment has already been degraded. Meanwhile, the assessment of impact prediction

on SEA is not deep such as an EIA. Scott and Marsden (2003) argued that the impact predictions usually address

the probability that the impact will occur. Therefore, impacts of the plan will often be uncertain. The level of detail

at which predictions can be made will depend on the nature of the PPP. In some cases, it will be possible to give

specific, often quantitative, predictions of impacts (e.g. change in CO2 emissions, loss of habitats, etc.), but in

others it may only be possible to predict the likely direction of change (e.g. an increase or decrease in emissions)

but not possible to quantify them. This is also happening to the impact prediction at the level of spatial plan which

only mention the impact distribution as well as the impact area wide (hectare) (OECD, 2006).

2.4 Environmental Sensitivity

Kreske, (1996) in the Environmental Impact Statement mention that relevant natural resources and environmental

sensitivities should be described as environmental baseline in the SEA report. Cumulative environmental

sensitivities mean existing environmental problems and pressures on the environment. Vukicevic and Nedovic-

Budic (2012) also mention that cumulative environmental sensitivities illustrate the degree of overlap of co-

occurring environmental issues. This is a basis to assess the local environment likely to be affected by the PPP.

Therivel, (2010) discusses regarding the foundation assessment of environmental baseline. Baseline data commonly

cover environmental sensitivities of resources such as current surface water at risk and current ground waters at

risk which describes the current state of sensitive area of environmental degradation. Further environmental

sensitivity also include ecological designations, cultural heritage and sensitive habitats which are categorized as

protected areas from the development. In many cases, site designations for landscape, archaeological interest may

indicate the sensitive environment (Aschemann, Jahn, Partidario and Sadler, 2011). The aim of identification

sensitive areas is to generate alternative plan and evaluate the impact of the planning activities. Thus, environmental

pressures (e.g. urban expansion, population changes and land contamination) need to be considered to anticipate

potential environmental impacts.

Environmental sensitivity assessment provides an indication of the areas that are most environmental sensitive to

the development. This assessment has been considered during the SEA process to prepare environmental baseline

information of sensitive area (Eirgrid, 2011). Environmental sensitivity called as the baseline situation or the do-

nothing or do-minimum scenario. The environment sensitive area will be used to facilitate the identification of the

impacts of the proposed plan and its alternative. It is also described as a benchmark against other alternatives

which can be compared (OPDM, 2005)

Several studies and regulation have discussed specific indicators of environmental sensitive areas which include

valued resources and the sensitivity indicator based on SEA Directive. Annex 1 of the SEA Directive requires

consideration of environmental sensitivity and development pressure to be incorporated in the impact assessment.

Cooper (2011) discusses the element of environmental resources which is called as affected receptors. The contents

of environmental sensitivity with regard to the issues of environmental resources and each resource have a certain

indicator of sensitivity.

There are several and broad indicators of the environment, it means the indicators should be adapted to the type

of assessment and the local condition. SEA Directive mentioned specific consideration of environmental resources

such as biodiversity, population and human health, soil, water, air and climatic factors, material assets, cultural



heritage and landscape (CEC, 2001). Annexes I to III of the INSPIRE Directive also list thematic layers relevant

to SEA, such as protected sites or land cover (CEC, 2007). The baseline and environmental effects can also include

matters not listed in Annex I, such as geological conditions, mineral resources, flood risk, energy consumption,

noise and light pollution (OPDM, 2005).

Meanwhile, environmental resources in Indonesia can be described as water, air, soil, waste (Republic of Indonesia,

2009). Atkinson and Canter (2011) states that the indicators of environmental resources and development pressure

can be used to identify environmental sensitivities areas that have the greatest impacts of development. Therefore,

spatial planning consideration is also incorporated in the assessment with existing and proposed infrastructure (e.g.

transport corridors), population density (i.e. census data) and planning applications (e.g. development of massive

housing, industrial expansion zones, etc.) to address development pressure areas (Vukicevic and Nedovic-Budic,

2012). The description of the existing environment will be great if all information is available. However, it should

stay focused on the key issues and provide only information on the existing environment that is relevant to the

analyses of key issues. If soils or diversity of plant and animal species are not key issues, don’t provide detailed

lists of soil types or lists every plant and animal within the study area (Kreske, 1996). The indicators of

environmental sensitivity indicators are described based on the SEA/EIA best practices and the

standard/regulation (see. table 2, table 3 and table 4)

Table 2: Environmental sensitivities in International SEA report (in Ireland)

Environmental Resources Key sensitivities

Biodiversity and flora and fauna Protected habitats, natural heritage areas

Population and human health Population increase, water supply

Soil Hydrogeological and ecological function, soil permeability

Air and climate factors Air quality, transport, level of congestion, noise

Cultural heritage Cultural heritage sites

Landscape Water bodies for tourism, green open spaces, landscape

constraints

Population and human health Population increase

Water Water quality of ground water and surface water (rivers, lake,

transitional).

Material Assets Water service infrastructure, waste

Source: Eirgrid, (2011)

Table 3: Indicator of environmental component in EIA (in Indonesia)

Environmental component Environmental resources Indicators

Geo-Physic component Water Quality and quantity of Groundwater, Surface

water

Air Air quality

Soil Soil fertility

Geology Geological preservation area, geological

disaster-prone areas and areas that provide

protection of ground water.

Noise Noise level (dB)

Biology component Vegetation State of flora and fauna

Ecosystem

Biodiversity

Sosio-economy – culture

component

Cultural heritage Archaeological preservation area

Livelihood Livelihood information in relation to

economic status

Population Population distribution

Human health component Health risk Health condition

Source: Ministry of Environment Republic Indonesia, (2012)



9

Table 4: Indicator of environmental impact and risk in SEA (Indonesia)

Environmental resources Environmental Issues

Biodiversity Deterioration of Biodiversity

Land use changes Protected area (forest), agriculture, plantation etc.

Hazard Landslide, flood, forest fire, drought, etc.

Human health Health risk

Source: Ministry of Environment Republic Indonesia, (2011)

Environmental sensitivity is indicated by the range from low to high sensitive such an index. Index in this concept

shows the level degree of sensitivity. Index of environment sensitivity also applied in SEA as a baseline / existing

information. The scale of sensitivity is standardized In a value / number and could be classified into sensitivity

classes such as high – low, good - bad etc (CAAS Ltd, 2013). The assessment was carried out the sensitive area of

degradation such as River Status Sensitive Map and Groundwater Status Sensitive Map.

2.5 Cumulative Environmental Sensitivity (CES) González et al. (2011) mentions that the combination of sensitive resources in one area reflects the accumulation

of environmental sensitivity. In other words, the environmental sensitivity that overlap at one location described

as cumulative environmental sensitivitity (CES). Del Campo (2008) considers CES can contribute to the entire

Strategic Environment Assessment (SEA) process. Cumulative environmental sensitivity can combine relevant

quantitative (e.g. water and air quality indicators) and qualitative data (e.g. biodiversity, landscape). Information

sources encompass publishing documents, statistics and spatial datasets (EC, 2009). Standard checklists can be

used to identify which environmental aspects need to be considered in terms of their relevance (OPDM, 2005;

Ministry of Environment Republic Indonesia, 2011). GIS applications have the potential to facilitate the

assessment of cumulative environmental sensitivity as a scooping process in SEA. This can be achieved by

overlaying several maps of the environmental sensitivity in order to identify the most sensitivity within the area

occur (González et al., 2011). Meanwhile weighting system applied through Geographical Information System

(GIS) software was used in order to calculate the sensitivity of all areas. In their assessment also scale of sensitivity

for each area corresponds to the scoring of sensitivity factors; 5 points corresponds to one sensitivity factor; 10

points corresponds to two sensitivity factors; 20 points corresponds to four sensitivity factors and so on (CAAS

Ltd, 2013). The scores for each area are combined together in order to determine cumulative or overall sensitivity

as is shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4: Example of Cumulative Environmental Sensitivity Map

Source: SEA Longford Development Plan 2015-2021



Gonzálz et al. (2011) also applied GIS-Multi Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) to obtain the cumulative

environmental sensitivity map. This approach combines several geographical data (map criteria) and value

judgments (stakeholders / experts preferences) to obtain the cumulative environmental sensitivity map. The

approach of GIS MCDA incorporates relative weights which is called as Weighted-overlay mapping techniques.

Weighted-overlay results help identify areas of high vulnerability which is also called as sensitivity (Vukicevic and

Nedovic-Budic, (2012); González et al., (2011)). However, initial approaches to weighted-overlay methods

commonly normalise the total vulnerability of a given area when dividing the total value by the number of issues

which occurs at that given location (Antunes, Santos and Jordão, 2001). WLC is a compensatory method in the

sense that a high score on one sensitive criterion can be compensated by a low score (Thérivel et al., 2004; del

Campo, 2008). This technique will be ignoring the sense of cumulative nature of sensitivity and impact that overlap

in a region. Therefore, another approach of cumulative assessment.need to explore using map combination

(overlay) operations in GIS such as Boolean overlay (AND and OR), Addition and Multiplication.

In order to establish cumulative environmental sensitivities, overlay mapping techniques can be used to map and

spatially assess sensitive environmental areas (e.g. protected landscapes or groundwater protection areas) by

superimposing grid layers (Thérivel et al., 2004). Meanwhile, Steadman et al. (2004) carried out the grid conversion

from polygon data to adding all different layers of environmental sensitivity. They use vector grid to generate grid

cells, each cell has a score which is obtained by standard and/or expert judgement.

Davis (2001) discusses a major ecological application of GIS in the protection of sensitive areas. Figure 5 shows

how GIS overlay is used to combine the different sensitivity sites.

Figure 5: Environmental Sensitivity Assessment

Source: (Davis, 2001)

2.6 Summarized

This chapter presents a detailed understanding on the concepts of Environment Sensitivity, Cumulative

Environment Sensitivity (CES) and Cumulative Impact (CI). The concept of environmental sensitivity is assessed

to obtain an understanding of the existing state of the environment with respect to the aspects that may be affected

by the Plan. Those are a part of activities in Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA). There are two (2)

definition of environmental sensitivity, which are related to environmental protection and degradation. According



11

to SEA directive, environmental sensitivity is related to environmental degradation, the definition is “environmental

resources that are particularly sensitive, in decline or if practicable are near their threshold (since these components may not be able to

cope with the multiple stresses) (OPDM, 2005). In other words, environmental sensitivity is the state of environmental

condition which are degraded such as surface water pollution, groundwater pollution, air pollution, soil erosion

and so on. Davis (2001) also explains the degradation area as areas where the environment is at risk or in

destruction from some proposed feature or process of activities in the present situation. SEA directive further

classify locating sites that need protection is usually termed with sensitivity such as ecological designations, cultural

heritage and sensitive habitats.

Environmental sensitivity are shown as an index. The scale of sensitivity is standardized in a value / number and

could be classified into sensitivity classes (e.g. high – low, good – bad). GIS used to provide a visualisation of CES

index, enhance understanding of the spatial distribution and explore the implications of the proposed plan on the

environmental resources (Davis, 2001 ; Vukicevic & Nedovic-Budic, 2012 ; Eirgrid, 2011; González et al., 2011).

The GIS overlay method will be explored in the following chapter. The CES index will illustrate the degree of

overlap co- occurring environmental sensitivity in the study area. Where the mapping of environmental sensitivity

shows a concentration of high sensitivity and the pressure of development plan located in the highly sensitive area,

it is indicate the most conflict area and cause likely potential Cumulative Impact (CI) on the environment.



3. Methodology

This chapter discusses the methodology framework and strategy to establish the criteria and indicator of environmental sensitivity, to

generate environmental sensitivity index map of each indicator, to accomplish a cumulative environment sensitivity (CES) index map

and to describe the potential cumulative impact (CI) of the proposed plan. Further, the different maps combination techniques (i.e,

addition and multiplication) and the rule-based classification were compared to represent CES index.

3.1 Research Design

The research design (Figure. 6) is a design formulation of works that will be undertaken in this research to answer

research questions as well as to develop the conclusions and recommendations for the research problem. This

section briefly discusses the general structure of the overall research which is divided into three (3) different steps,

which are:

Phase I: Pre Field Work

Literature review and fieldwork preparation:

The first phase is to understand the existing situation in the study area to obtain the criteria and indicators of

environmental sensitivity. This phase was done through reviewing the documents of spatial planning and Focus

Group Discussion (FGD) report of Yogyakarta-Sadeng corridor spatial plan and environmental report in D.I

Yogyakarta province. List of issues and preliminary environmental research were prepared for the material

interview with local experts. Selection of experts was prepared in this stage based on FGD report and consultation

with the proponent of Yogyakarta-Sadeng corridor spatial plan.

Phase II : Fieldwork

Primary and secondary data collection:

Consultation process starts during fieldwork to compile both primary and secondary data. Primary data was

obtained from semi-structured interview with the local experts. While, secondary data was collected from relevant

agencies of D.I Yogyakarta province. The role of experts in this process is to derive the types of environmental

resources as well as to establish indicators and criteria to measure and classify environmental sensitivity.

Phase III : Post-Fieldwork

Analysis, comparison and conclusion

The results of semi-structured interview and secondary data were analysed to generate the criteria and indicators

of environmental sensitivity. Several indicators were depicted on the maps to generate environmental sensitivity

index. The maps were created to prepare Uniform Analysis Zones (UAZ) layers in order to generate Cumulative

Environmental Sensitivity (CES) index map. UAZ are GIS generated polygons, which are homogeneous in all

respects. For instance, all polygons within a UAZ have the same slope, are located in the same municipality, are

within the same distance of an existing or proposed highway, and so on (Klosterman, 1999). Further, the

combination (overlay) technique of map algebra calculation such as “addition” and “multiplication” as well as the

“rule-based” classification were performed and compared to identify the most representation technique in

cumulative assessment. Then, the suitable technique was used for further analysis in Cumulative Impact (CI).



13

In order to identify the impact magnitude, several criteria were established based on literature review of impact

assessment as well as the assessment result of environmental sensitivity index maps. The aim is to identify potential

conflict zones and the likely cumulative impact resulting from the proposed plan activities.

Figure 6: Research Design



3.2 Primary and Secondary Data Collection

Data collection was done by conducting fieldwork for 3 weeks in Yogyakarta, and 1 week in Jakarta, Indonesia.

The primary data was collected by a semi-structured interview. The first objective of semi-structured interview was

to discuss the preliminary results of criteria and indicator for environmental sensitivity. The preliminary

environmental resources were elaborated based on strategic issues which are mentioned in the state of

environmental report of D.I Yogyakarta Province and Focus Group Discusssion (FGD) report on Yogyakarta-

Sadeng Corridor Spatial Plan. Meanwhile, the proposed criteria and indicator were explained based on expert

interview and supported by literature review, standards and regulations. The next objective of semi-structured

interview is to obtain the sensitivity score of the selected indicator. The values of indicators which were not

provided by regulation were discussed with the experts (See. Appendix A).

The secondary data were obtained from different institutions in D.I.Yogyakarta province. Several data were

compiled such as spatial data (vector format) as well as non-spatial data (documents). The lists of spatial and non-

spatial data which are most relevant to the research can be seen in Table 5.

Table 5 : Lists of Spatial and Non Spatial Data

NO DATA COLLECTED YEAR & TYPE SOURCE

1 Land Use Existing Map 2012 Shp Spatial Planning Sector,

2 Land Use Plan Map 2012-

2033

Shp Spatial Planning Sector

3 Administrative Boundary (Sub-District) 2011 Shp Spatial Planning Sector

4 Agriculture and Plantation Map 2011 Shp Spatial Planning Sector

5 River Map 2011 Shp Spatial Planning Sector

6 River boundary (10 meters and 50 meters) 2011 Shp Spatial Planning Sector

7 Slope Map 2011 Shp Spatial Planning Sector

8 Forest Area 2011 Shp Spatial Planning Sector

9 Industrial area 2011 Shp Spatial Planning Sector

10 Residential area 2011 Shp Spatial Planning Sector

11 Population existing 2011 Excel Statistical Agency

12 Population projection 2011 Shp Spatial Planning Sector

13 GDP/capita of sub-district 2011 Excel Statistical Agency

14 Karst Area (eksokarst, edokarst) 2011 Shp Geology Sector

15 Report : Karst Landscape Delineation DI

Yogyakarta

2011 PDF Geology Sector

16 Mining Area 2011 Shp Geology Sector

17 Soil Map (soil type, infiltration type) 2010 Shp Geology Sector

18 Groundwater depth 2010 Shp Geology Sector

19 Main road 2011 Shp Spatial Planning Sector

20 Traffic level main road corridor Yogyakarta-Sadeng 2011 Shp Point Spatial Planning Sector

21 Emission level (CO, CO2, PM10, HC) 2011 Shp, point

sampling

& Excel

Centre of Transportation and

Logistic

22 River water monitoring report 2011 PDF Environmental Agency

23 River water quality (Opak and Kuning River) 2011 Excel &

Point

Sampling

Environmental Agency

24 Groundwater monitoring report

25 Groundwater quality (DHL parameter) 2011 Shp Environmental Agency

26 Groundwater quality (coliform & TDS parameter) 2011 PDF

& Point

Sampling

Environmental Agency

27 State of Environment 2011 PDF Environmental Agency

28 Water pipe coverage area 2011 PDF &

Excel

Water Service Provider



15

29 Sanitation Profile 2011 PDF Public Works Sector

30 Health profile (sub-district) 2011 PDF Public Works Sector

31 Biodiversity profile (Karst area) 2011 PDF Forestry Sector

32 Draft Yogyakarta-Sadeng Corridor Spatial Plan 2012-

2032

PDF Spatial Planning Sector

32 D.I Yogyakarta Province Spatial Planning

Regulation

2010 PDF Spatial Planning Sector

34 FGD report Yogyakarta-Sadeng Corridor Spatial

Plan

2011 PDF Spatial Planning Sector

35 Gunungkidul District Spatial Plan 2011 Shp Spatial Planning Sector

Most of data describe the baseline condition in 2011-2012 and geological study such as soil map in 2010. The data

therefore describe the environmental state in the existing situation before the design of spatial plan for 2012-2032

was made. The use of the above data is in many cases constrained by the various scale at which they are made

available. In the context of the Indonesia planning system, a strategic level is commonly represented at local level

1:50.000 scale, because it consists of the selected administrative unit. Thus, land use map for this research were

provided with this scale. Meanwhile, the relevant environmental datasets such as soil map, aquifer map and water

recharge area map are available at the scale at which they were collected, which in most cases reflects a regional

context or province level (1:100.000 scale). This research combine these data sets including interpretation of

scoring from regulation, literature and expert judgement.

3.3 Methods used to Develop Criteria and Indicators for Environmental Sensitivity

3.3.1 Document Review

Fergusson and Wilkinson (1995) discussed the standard choice of criteria and indicators used in a given SEA, that

the indicators could; (1) represent key issues; (2) be based on valid principle and assumptions; (3) be based on

relatively easy to collect information, preferably information that has already been available; (4) lead to the

measurement of baseline information and / or the prediction of impacts; (5) stimulate the input of decision-makers

and the public choice. According to those standards and strategic issues in D.I Yogyakarta Province, the types of

environmental resources to be assessed in this research were identified. The information on key issues was

collected from reviewing the environmental state report. Thus, the environmental sensitivity was assessed

according to the selected environmental resources. Whereas, the indicators to measure environmental sensitivity

were determined based on expert opinion and supported with the regulation or standard and the relevant previous

study. Therefore, the relevant document were reviewed in this research (Table 6). Those documents in table 6 have

been selected according to the usefulness in supporting this research.

Table 6: Documents Reviewed

Documents reviewed Usefulness

State of environmental report D.I Yogyakarta Province To identify environment condition and environmental issues in

the study area.

Draft of Yogyakarta-Sadeng Corridor Spatial Plan To identify the proposed plan activities and type of

environmental consideration in the spatial plan.

FGD report of Yogyakarta-Sadeng Spatial Plan To identify the strategic issues as a basis in the selection of

environmental resources in this research.

SEA and EIA guidance and best practices To identify the method used in describing CES and CIA and to

generate criteria and indicator for impact magnitude.

Regulation, standard and literature of soil, biodiversity,

karst, air pollution, groundwater etc

To support the judgement from expert in developing indicator

and criteria to measure sensitivity.

Previous study and report of soil, biodiversity, karst, air

pollution, groundwater and other environmental

resources in Yogyakarta-Sadeng.

To support the classification of sensitive area in Yogyakarta-

Sadeng corridor.



3.3.2 Expert Selection

The relevant local agency was selected based on preliminary results of environmental resources which will be

considered in this research. Lists of stakeholders in the Focus Group Discussion (FGD) report of Yogyakarta-

Sadeng Spatial Plan was adopted to narrow the expertise involved in this research. Selection of the key experts was

also supported by consultation with the proponent of Yogyakarta-Sadeng spatial plan. The proponent is a spatial

plan unit in Public Works and Housing Agency D.I Yogyakarta province. Thus, the first interview was conducted

with the proponent and their planning consultant. After selecting the important environmental resources to be

analysed in this research, the experts have been chosen based on an SEA standard for stakeholder involvement

and also based on the criteria with regards to their background and expertise. The standards for stakeholder

involvement in SEA by Vicente and Partidário (2006) are:

Co-thinking: stakeholder who has useful information and /or technical knowledge as a valuable content

as an input of the process or has sources of expert knowledge;

Co-working/Co-operating: stakeholder who is actively involved in the process with contribution and

participation;

Co-knowing: stakeholder who should be kept informed about the progress, as a mean for supplying the

information, although they do not actively involved in the process

The role of key experts is to define the relevant indicator and criteria and to give score to the level of sensitivity (if

not available in the standard and /or regulation). Besides following the SEA standard for stakeholder involvement,

the selection of key experts were also based on the following criteria:

(1) Background, responsibility and capacity in the relation to selected resources,

(2) Minimum 8 years work experience in the related field,

(3) Familiar with the existing situation.

3.3.3 Semi- Structured Interview

A semi-structured interview method was used to discuss with key experts. According to the selection of expert,

nine (9) persons were contacted as key experts in this research. Personal interview were conducted to gain a deep

insight from each expert point of view and their expertise and to be flexible in managing the meeting schedule due

to time constraint. This method facilitated to ask additional questions in order to get more insights from their

answer. The interviews were designed to ask their argument of proposed criteria and indicators of environmental

sensitivity in Yogyakarta-Sadeng Corridor (see. Appendix A). The criteria and indicators were also depend on the

availability of existing data.

Semi –structured interview was conducted in two types;

a) Interview with the proponent, with the objective to:

Know the planning process as well as the SEA process in Yogyakarta-Sadeng corridor detailed plan.

Discuss whether there is an assessment of cumulative environmental sensitivity and cumulative

environmental impact in the SEA.

Discuss the demand of economic activities.

Discuss the proposed plan which likely have impact on the environment.

Discuss the proposed environmental sensitivity indicator and types of environmental baseline which

have already been conducted in the spatial plan.

b) Interview with the selected experts, with the objective to:

Select the strategic issues in the study area in relation with environmental resources/component.

Develop the indicator and the criteria of environmental sensitivity in Yogya-Sadeng Corridor.

Classify the degree of environmental sensitivity and translated into a sensitivity score for each criterion.



17

3.3.4 Expert Judgement

Expert judgment is widely applied, particularly during scoping in the SEA process. Consultation with key

organisations and the public, a mandatory requirement under the SEA Directive, may be used to appraise expert

judgements. However, it is considered to be non-replicable and non-scientific with the potential for bias (Therivel,

2004), as different opinions and different interpretations can occur. Therefore, in this research, no more than two

experts were involved to give a judgement in order to elicit the criteria, indicators, and giving input for sensitivity

score.

Expert judgments can be supported with primary data (i.e. field survey) and secondary data (i.e.

standard/regulation and previous study) to increase the objectivity of judgements (Morris and Therivel, 1995).

Therefore, standard and literature were referred to support the justification from experts who have the capacity

and knowledge in the related field.

3.4 Method to generate an Environmental Sensitivity Index

3.4.1 GIS processing

The interview results regarding indicator, criteria and classification of environmental sensitivity were depicted into

the map through GIS map processing. Therefore, simple GIS map processing such as querying, union, clip,

interpolation, creating/editing GIS vector map, including build line and polygon topology were adopted. Such as

mapping air pollution was done through interpolation using Inverse distance weighting (IDW). This is the simplest

interpolation method which were identified and a weighted average was taken from the observed values within the

point sampling of neighbourhood. The weights are a decreasing function of distance (Lu and Wong, 2008). Wong,

Yuan, and Perlin (2004) were applied IDW and kriging to develop an air quality model. They mention that IDW

showed better similarity between measured and interpolated values of air quality parameter than kriging method.

Therefore, IDW was used to predict a value for any unmeasured location of air pollution and surrounding the

predicted location

Since the data sources and the spatial unit were different, those tools are important to do data correction. Such

digital maps (composed of one or multiple vector datasets) provide the basis for the spatial assessment of

environmental and planning issues. The various data sets were provided by governmental departments and most

of digital maps were available in vector format. Vector datasets commonly include administrative and infrastructure

elements (e.g. administrative boundaries and roads), as well as topographic and environmental features (e.g.

elevation contours, rivers). Additional national and locally specific datasets may include soils, geology, aquifers,

land use and so on. They provide spatial and thematic illustrations of environmental considerations, facilitating the

description of the baseline environment. The procedure of mapping environmental sensitivity in each resource

can be described in Table 7.



Table 7: Digital mapping process

Mapping Data Sources GIS processing Results

3.4.2 Scoring and Reclassification

Reclassification process in Table 7 was adopted to standardize the different class and score of environmental

sensitivity into similar unit. Some of the sensitivity classes were determined based on expert judgement, while the

rest were based on standard/regulation. The criteria scores of sensitivity were shown in different unit (quantitative,

qualitative). Some of sensitivity class by standard/regulation in was already provided into four classes, such as

standard of air pollution, infiltration rate (water recharge), population and soil erosion. The lowest sensitivity score

was mostly provided from the score of one. Thus, the proponent and other experts agreed to provide a simple

linear scoring system to normalize the different measurement unit, giving a range index from 1 to 4, 4 being equal

to the high sensitivity. The score within ranges of 1-4 were classified as table below.

1. Groundwater quality map Sleman, Bantul, GK District

2. Groundwater quality monitoring 2011

Groundwater

quality

1. Querying 2. Reclassification

Groundwater

pollution index map of Yogyakarta-Sadeng

Corridor

Water Access 1. Groundwater depth

2. Water pipe coverage area

1. Union


Water supply

sensitivity index map of Yogyakarta-Sadeng

Corridor

Air Pollution 1. Monitoring report and

Point sampling of CO, CO2, PM10, HC pollutant. 2. Total Pollutant Index (Pij)

1. Inverse Distance Weighted (IDW)

2. Union 3. Reclassification

Water supply

sensitivity index map of Yogyakarta-Sadeng

Corridor

Ecosystem

Karst Land use, Karst delineation 1. Querying

2. Reclassification 3. Digitizing

Karst sensitivity index

map of Yogyakarta-Sadeng Corridor

Water

recharge area

Soil map, permeable area of D.I Yogyakarta

1. Clip


Water recharge sensitivity index map

of Yogyakarta-Sadeng Corridor

Soil erosion Soil type, Slope map.

ero

1. Clip

2. Union 3. Reclassification

Soil erosion sensitivity index map of

Yogyakarta-Sadeng Corridor

Biodiversity Forest delineation, land use map

Population 1. Querying 2. Digitizing

3. Reclassification

Agriculture Agriculture land use map

1. Clip 2. Querying

3. Reclassification

1. Clip


Population densitity

Biodiversity sensitivity index map of


Agriculture sensitivity

index map of Yogyakarta-Sadeng

Corridor

Population sensitivity index map of




19

Table 8: Scoring and classification for environmental sensitivity

Environment sensitivity class Score

Non sensitive 1

Low sensitivity 2

Medium sensitivity 3

High sensitivity 4

3.5 Method to Generate Cumulative Environment Sensitivity Index Map

Uniform Analysis Zones (UAZ) has been applied to express cumulative assessment of environmental sensitivity.

This approach directly relates to the value of the sensitive environment that overlap at one location. The proposed

assessment prospects several indicators of environmental sensitivity which were described as an overall sensitive

area to develop because of high protection (biodiversity, agriculture, water recharge and karst ecosystem) and high

degradation (air pollution, soil erosion, water supply, groundwater pollution and population density). These

classifications useful as a basis to identify the environment sensitive area which needs to preserve from the

development and to control which caused by the development in the present situation. In order to generate a CES

index map, vector overlay has been established using map algebra of addition and multiplication the overall value.

Raster format is mainly used for overlay applications in making a map index. However, this research uses vector

format in the overlay application with the several reasons such as; (1) Most of data sources were available in vector

format; (2) The boundary locations are more precise through polygon features, and (3) Data about individual

features can easily be recovered for updating or correction.

3.5.1 Uniform Analysis Zones (UAZ) and GIS Overlay

In order to generate Cumulative Environment Sensitivity (CES) index map, the Uniform Analysis Zones (UAZ)

approach was selected. UAZ are GIS generated polygons, which are homogeneous in all respects (Klosterman and

AKRON, 2001). The UAZ scheme as first proposed by Klosterman (1999) and introduced into what IF planning

support system in generating land suitability allocation which were represented by the level degree of suitability.

UAZ scheme was considered by Yaakup, Bakar, Zalina, and Sulaiman (2004) in generating environmental sensitive

areas which were represented by the level degree of sensitivity.

In this research, several GIS database were used to create Uniform Analysis Zones (UAZ) layers based on the

selected environmental resources. UAZ were created to generate adequate layers and to combine all of the relevant

layers of information to define the UAZ layers of CES that are used in the study area. The UAZ layers contain

information of indicators to measure sensitivity which was provided in each of the basic layers of environmental

resources, i.e., agriculture land use, forestry, karst, slope, soil erosion, water infiltration zones, the availability of

water access (groundwater and pipe water), population density, groundwater and air pollution at risk. The process

of creating UAZ layer includes combining of GIS functions. The GIS functions involved in the process are overlay

and classification. Thus, overlay vector “union” command were employed to generate UAZ layer and were

classified into the same unit of sensitivity which leading to a map CES index for protection and degradation.

3.5.2 Map Algebra Combination

There are some commonly used classes of map algebra combination in GIS operations i.e. Boolean overlay (such

as AND and OR), Addition, Multiplication and weighted linear combination (WLC). Based on Malczewski (2006),

the use of GIS-MCDA by WLC approach allows that society is composed of diverse publics w ith different values

and reflecting the fact that some issues may be more important than others through the weighting system.

However, it has a risk of manipulation as it can lead to very different results depending on who establishes the



weighting and scoring systems (Boroushaki and Malczewski, 2010). WLC is a compensatory method in the sense

that a high score on criteria can be compensated by low importance score (low weightage as given by experts)

resulting in low sensitivity (Thérivel et al., 2004; del Campo, 2008). Therefore, WLC is less appropriate to explain

the sensitivity based on the cumulative score of various types of criteria. In order to find a suitable method for

cumulative assessment, addition and multiplication technique using vector format were applied.

a. Addition (+)

Addition of vectors is common when combining the different sources. Then every sensitivity map were combined

(superimposed) into one layer map of the cumulative environmental sensitivity index. Each polygon value is being

added between environmental sensitivity maps to show environmental sensitive area. The mathematical

formulation of map algebra is:

CES = air + groundwater + population + soil erosion....

b. Multiplication (x)

The multiplication is a common type of overlay operation that makes use of map algebra. The operation shows

that cell values of polygon are multiplied between each variable in the attribute table. The mathematical formulation

of map algebra is:

CES = air x groundwater x population x soil erosion....

For the criteria of which the data were available, the raw scores were in different units/magnitudes and therefore

were being reclassified into 4 levels of sensitivity. Meanwhile, for the criteria of which the proxy data were not

available, they were accordingly given score of 1-4 based on experts judgement. To combine the scores of all

criteria, algebraic operations of addition and multiplication were then performed using vector format (Figure 7).

The results were further reclassified again into 4 levels of cumulative sensitivity.

Water Supply

Polygon Score

A 700

B 200

C 550

Classification/Standardize

Polygon Score

A 4

B 1

C 2

Addition and Multiply

Soil erosion

Polygon Score

A 90

B 10

C 230

Polygon Score

A 3

B 1

C 4

Polygon (+) (x)

A 8 12

B 6 4

C 7 8

Reclassify

Pol (+) (x)

A 3 2

B 2 1

C 2 1

Groundwater quality

Polygon Score

A 35

B 100

C 45

Polygon Score

A 1

B 4

C 1

“Highest scores have

highest sensitivity”

Figure 7: Addition and Multiply operation

3.5.3 Data Classification Method for CES

For thematic map presentation, the analysed thematic data values are often grouped into classes, which simplify

the reading of the map. In order to classify the data, the best method was identified based on the variance values

of data. The cumulative value of sensitivity has been classified into four classes of negligible, low, moderate, and

high sensitivity. This classification used to identify the most sensitive areas in the corridor. To give the better



21

classification and the variance of sensitive areas, the type of reclassification should be considered and distinguished.

The addition and multiplication values have been classified based on the natural breaks classification method,

where similar values that cluster together are placed into a single class and the differences between the classes

occur where there is gap between cluster (ESRI, 2008). The reason to choose this method of classification are

explained according to the types of the data sets. The type of data is unevenly distributed, that is many features

have the same or similar values and there are gaps between groups of values. The gaps shown in the total score of

addition and multiplication. Hence, the important purpose of using natural breaks is to minimise value differences

between data within the same class. Thus, this research adopted “natural breaks (jenk)” classification method in

Arc GISTM to classify the cumulative score automatically.

Beside the automatic classification method in ArcGISTM, another classification of sensitivity was also adopted in

this research. The classification was done manually using the concept of rule-based classification technique in order

to identify whether this approach is appropriate to generate CES. Sydor and Hausmann (2007) was adopted rule-

based system to interpret environmental conditions that relate to a specific parcel. The specific rule was create in

their study to determine the correspondence of attribute value to identify a high risk or a low risk (with respect to

environmental risk).

“Rule classification is the process of taking attributes layer and grouping similar clusters into groups called classes. A class contains

one or more rules that can build based on our knowledge of certain features. Each rule contains one or more attributes such as area,

score, length, or texture, which constrain to a specific range of values” (Exelisvis.com, 2015).

A rule-based classifier is used as a set of IF-THEN rules for classification. It uses logical operators AND, OR,

NOT (Exelisvis.com, 2015). In this research, the rules were prepared into probability lists according to the

measurement of dominant sensitivity score in each polygon. The example of rule-based (probability list) in this

research are:

In an area with most criteria having scores of 4 (high sensitivity) with only a few criteria having lower

scores, after combination the overall score was classified as 4 (high sensitivity). Then the query formula is:

IF : Score airpollution = 3 AND Score groundwater = 4 AND Score soil erosion = 4 AND Score

Population density = 4 THEN Overall score = 4.

In an area with most criteria having a score of 2 (low sensitivity) with only a few criteria having other

scores, after combination the overall score was classified as 2 (low sensitivity). Then the query formula is:

IF: Score air pollution = 3 AND Score groundwater = 2 AND Score soil erosion = 2 AND Score

Population density = 2 THEN Overall score =2.

Rule based classification applied to see the distribution of cumulative sensitive area. Rule based were classified a

new example with the consequences of the “rule” with the degree of assumption. The performance in each polygon

was classified by “if,,then,,” rules through the query tool. However, this was done by personal subjective without

any discussion with the experts. The rules are based on the combination of sensitive value in one polygon feature

(area). Such as, “If an area that overlap within the dominant value of high sensitive, but combined with other lower

score of sensitivity, then it is considered as highly sensitive”. The rule based classification of sensitivity index

classes is presented in Table 9.



Table 9: CES rule based classification

Sensitivity classes Rule Based Classification

Negligible - Polygon with the dominant score of non-sensitive (1)

- Combination with the scores of non-sensitive (1) and low sensitivity (2)

Low - Polygon with the dominant score of low sensitivity (2)

- Combination with the scores of non-sensitive (1) and moderate

sensitivity (3)

- Dominant non-sensitive (1) score and combination between low (2) and

moderate (3) sensitivity

Moderate - Polygon with dominant moderate score (3) and combination with other

lowest score sensitivity (1 and 2).

- Combination between low (2) and moderate (3) sensitivity

- Combination of non-sensitive (1), low (2), moderate (3) and high

sensitivity (4) score.

High - Polygon with dominant high score (4) and combination with other

lowest score sensitivity.

- Combination between low (2), and has dominant moderate (3) and high

sensitivity score (4).

- Combination between moderate (3) and high (4) sensitivity score.

3.6 Method to identify the likely cumulative environment impact in SEA

The types of impact prediction in SEA depend on the nature of the Policy, Plan and Program (PPP). Atkinson

and Canter (2011) selected criteria and indicators of environmental quality, established the sensitivity and identified

planning activities which were used to evaluate the impacts accumulation of future developments. This research

combines a qualitative method with spatial analysis, which assess the spatial distribution of cumulative impacts on

environmental resources (e.g. groundwater pollution, water recharge, air pollution, biodiversity) and identify where

impacts are worse. The steps in identifying potential impact and describing the cumulative impact area are as

follows:

1. Identify the proposed plan activities which were obtained from a draft of Yogyakarta-Sadeng corridor spatial

plan

2. Identify environmental resources (e.g., Groundwater, air, water recharge area, biodiversity) which were

important to be analysed according to the strategic environmental issues in Yogyakarta-Sadeng.

3. Identify the criteria to classify the impact magnitude (i.e. Low, Moderate, High) by reviewing the literature

of impact assessment and adopting the previous assessment of environmental sensitivity index.

4. Created UAZ layers to combine the several types of impact i.e. water recharge, biodiversity, air pollution

and groundwater pollution.

5. Classification of impact magnitude of water recharge area, biodiversity, air pollution and groundwater

pollution, which were scored using the ranges of 1 (one) as a low impact, 2 (two) as a moderate impact and

3 (three) as a high impact. The classification of impact magnitude within three levels of low-medium-high

were derived according to the methodology of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) such as in Morris

and Therivel (2001); Linkov and Ramadan (2004).

6. Query several criteria and categorized in to impact magnitude to generate UAZ layers of environmental

impacts.

7. The impact area on environment resources (i.e. water recharge area, biodiversity, air pollution and

groundwater pollution) have been put together to calculate the overall impact using UAZ method based on

“union” command and apply addition technique to add up the scores of each impact. It is to show the

location where the cumulative impacts most occur. Thus, the impact accumulation value has been classified

based on the “natural breaks classification”.



23

These approaches were aimed at producing impact maps for the spatial impact identification through evaluation

of the proposed plan activities. Therefore, the above steps were used to support delineation of potential conflict

zones and prediction of likely cumulative impacts.

3.7 Summarized

The chapter highlights the availability of vector dataset and how different elements of datasets have been used in

this research. The different environmental sensitive component and the indicator as well as the criteria to measure

it have been described that will be used in the producing of Cumulative Environment Sensitivity (CES) Index map

and Cumulative Impact map. Uniform Analysis Zones (UAZs) was performed using GIS operations of overlay

and classification. Therefore, the assessment of combination of different sensitivity unit was standardized into

same unit score or can be said as “reclassification”. There are several overlay and classification types were discussed

in this chapter. For the scope of this research, simple overlay technique using union operation has been used.

Further, the combination of environmental sensitivity was applied by addition and multiplication operation. In

order to identify the degree of sensitivity, the classification types such as natural breaks and rule based classification

have been formulated in this research. Similar GIS tools such as union, query and classification were also

performed to identify impact magnitude and potential cumulative impacts of the developmentn plan activities.



4. RESULTS AND DISCUSION

This chapter represents the results achieved by applying the methods which were discussed in chapter 3. First is the lists of key experts

which were involved in the interview. Then, the interview results as well as the results of the document review that was aimed to identify

the strategic issues and the indicators of environmental sensitivity and to determine sensitivity criteria and index classes. This chapter

also describes the result of mapping environmental sensitivity for selected environmental resources. Further, the techniques (i.e. addition,

multiplication, rule based) to accomplish CES index were elaborated and compared. Then, the assessment continued with developing

the impact magnitude indicators based on environmental sensitivity assessment. The overlapping between the high environmental sensitive

areas and the location of the proposed plan activities shows the area where a high impact will likely occur. Finally, the results followed

with the discussion of Cumulative Impact (CI). Most of the result produce several maps which are shows the distribution of sensitive

areas and impacted areas in Yogyakarta-Sadeng Corridor and explained based on sub-district administrative boundaries.

4.1 Identification of criteria and indicators of environment sensitivity based on

expert judgement

The selection of environmental sensitivity indicators is based on the consideration of strategic issues of

environment, this information was elicited through document reviewed as mentioned in chapter 3 and discussed

with the key experts who have capacity as an expert in the related field. The strategic issues were determined as a

basis to choose the indicator which will be assessed.

4.1.1 Identification Key Experts

The key experts were selected according to the criteria of expert selection, which described in the methodology

section. According to the FGD report, more than twenty stakeholders were involved in the FGD process of

Yogyakarta-Sadeng Spatial Plan. The stakeholders who were involved in the planning process and have an expertise

in the related environmental resources were selected as an expert. There are nine (9) groups of experts and eleven

(11) respondents, two of them are proponent of Yogyakarta-Sadeng corridor spatial plan. The proponent has given

several recommendations of environmental resources which are important to elaborate in this research. Then, the

selected environmental resources were discussed through in semi-structured interview with a relevant expert in

order to identify indicator and criteria to measure environmental sensitivity and impact magnitude in this research.

The experts were categorized according to their professional background and they were assigned as an

identification number (ID) to ease in analysis (Table. 10).



25

Table 10: Key Experts

No ID.No Name Profession of Key

Experts

Institution Description

1 ID1 Dra. Yosie Rosnidar Head Sub Division

Of Spatial Plan

Public Works and

Residential Agency

As the proponent of

Yogyakarta-Sadeng detailed

plan, they have information on

the planning process. Discuss

about the environmental issues

in Yogyakarta-Sadeng corridor

as well as the important

environmental resources to

indicate in this research.

2 Hogy Primavaleda,

S.T, M.Si

Technical Assistance

(Planning Expert)

CV. Cipta Buana

Sejati

3 ID2 Ir. Reni Anggraeni,

M.Sc

Head Sub-Section

Water Pollution

Environmental

Agency

Give recommendation to the

criteria, indicators and

sensitivity classes of

groundwater quality.

4 ID3 Nurrochmah

Wisudhaningrum

S.Hut, M.Si

Analyst of Forest

Ecosystem

Controlling

Forestry and

Conservation

Agency



sensitivity classes of biodiversity

5 ID4 Hidayati Sumardi

SIP, MM

Researcher Centre of Regional

Development

Research-

Yogyakarta



sensitivity classes of population

6 ID5 Heni Purwaningsih,

S.TP, MP

Researcher of

agriculture

technology

Institute for

Agricultural

Technology



sensitivity classes of agriculture

7 ID6 Dra. B.Bernanti

Dwisiwi

Head sub section of

Air Quality Control

Environmental

Agency



sensitivity classes of air

pollution.

8 Sa'duddin S.T, M.Sc Transport expert

(researcher)

The Centre of

Transportation and

Logistics -

Yogyakarta

9 ID7 Ir. Endy Nur Satria,

MT

Head Sub-section of

water infrastructure

Public Works and

Residential Agency



sensitivity classes of water

access.

10 ID8 Ir. Pujo Kristanto

M.Si,

Head section of

geology and mining

Geology, Energy

and Mineral

Resources Agency



sensitivity classes of geology

(karst, water recharge area)

11 ID9 Ir. Leo Yudha MT Geologist Geology, Energy

and Mineral

Resources Agency

Give recommendation of the

criteria, indicators and the

sensitivity classes of geology

and soil erosion

Source: semi-structured interview, 2014

4.1.2 Feedback Interview from the Experts

According to the definition of sensitivity, the characteristics of sensitive area are defined as the area that has a

function for environmental protection and the area that already degraded due to development pressure. There are

types of environmental resources that can be measured by the level of sensitivity. However, the types of

environmental resources were selected to be assessed according to the environmental issues in the study area and

the availability of data. Therefore, there are types of environmental resources which were proposed by the



proponent (ID1) but not taken into assessment such as water quality and health. Ideally, water quality should be

included, however the data on monitoring water surface quality are not sufficient to delineate the sensitive area.

Moreover, human health baseline condition was also one of the resources which was important according to an

interview but not considered in this research. Health is categorised as an indirect impact of the development, but

this research is focused on direct impact.

The proponent said that “the spatial plan of Yogyakarta-Sadeng corridor has finished and consider stakeholder

participation in the process. The result has been discussed in the National Coordination of Planning Board

(BKPRN) meeting, however this plan was rejected because it does not integrate SEA in the planning

process”..(ID1). Several issues related to environmental resources have been discussed during the FGD process

and the BKPRN meeting. The strategic issues were described in FGD report and supported by expert interviews

(see. Table 11).

It was mentioned in the planning document that air pollution might increase from the mobile sources (vehicle) as

a result of the economic development along the road corridor (D.I.Y Public Works and Residential Agency, 2013).

However, “there is no assessment on how much the emissions will be released from the vehicles” (ID1).

Meanwhile, some environmental components are also being addressed in this plan such as delineation of forest

area, karst area, river and springs boundary and water supply from groundwater and pipe water (ID1).

According to documents reviewed and interview results with the proponent and the key experts, the resources

have been selected to be considered in this research. Lists of sensitive criteria for each resources including the

indicators to measure them based on expert knowledge and the concerned issues is provided in Table 11.

Table 11: Criteria, Indicators and Related Issues

Environmental

resources

Indicator Criteria Regional issues of

concern

Cumulative Environmental Sensitivity for protection

Ecosystem Karst Karst with mining

activities

Karst conservation area

Karst with agriculture

Karst with residential

Non Karst

The delineation of karst

conservation area is

cosidered as highly

sensitive (ID8).

Disruption of exokarst

(surface karst) and

endokarst (subsurface

karst / underground

water) due to

development activities.

Biodiversity Forest Delineation:

- Conservation forest

- Protected forest

- Experimental forest

- Production forest

- Karst conservation

The delineation of

conservation forest is

considered as highly

sensitive to biodiversity

protection (ID3)

Fragmentation of habitat

due to loss of forest area

and the expansion of

development.

Water recharge area Level of infiltration The area with the rapid

infiltration is considered

highly sensitive to the

water recharge. This is

because the areas were

able to absorb rain water

in order to increase the

ground water reserves

(ID8 and ID9).

Decreasing of water

recharge areas due to

expansion of built up

areas.

Agriculture Agriculture delineation

- Agriculture wetlands

(irrigation)

The area that sensitive to

agricultural conversion is

Loss of agriculture

potential areas.



27

Environmental

resources

Indicator Criteria Regional issues of

concern

- Agriculture dry land

(rainfed)

- Plantation

considered as high

sensitivity (ID5).

Cumulative Environmental Sensitivity for degradation

Groundwater

pollution

Coliform :

<50 : non polluted

>50 : high polluted (unit :

MPN/100 ml)

The higher concentrate of

groundwater pollution is

considered as the high

sensitivity of groundwater

(ID2).

Increasing of

groundwater pollution

due to the high level

concentrates of coliform

bacteria.

Water access

Groundwater availability

(Aquifer /groundwater

depth level)

Non aquifer (high depth)

is considered as high

sensitivity for

groundwater supply

provision (ID7).

Lack of clean water

supply

Water pipe supply

(Coverage area of pipe

water system)

The area within less

coverage of pipe water

system is considered as

high sensitivity (ID7).

Air Pollution Vehicle emissions

(Total Pollutant Index

(Pij): CO, CO2, PM10,

HC)

The higher pollutant

concentrate is considered

as highly sensitive (ID6).

High traffic and lack of

public transportation

along the main road

corridor which could emit

more vehicle emission.

Soil erosion Soil lost (ton/ha/year) The highest score of soil

lost is considered highly

sensitive to the soil

erosion (ID9).

Soil erosion has been

occur especially in the

area within a high slope.

Population Population density

(person/ha)

The rise in population

density has put pressure

on the physical

environment and induced

labour migration between

rural areas to the towns

which can be an effect of

the disruption of social

life. High population

density area is considered

as highly sensitive (ID4)

Increase the pressure on

physical environment in

the high density areas.

Source: semi-structured interview, 2014

4.1.3 Discussion of Selection the Criteria and Indicators Based on Expert Judgment

Selected indicators through expert interview provided a specific measure of sensitivity and the sensitivity used as

an indicator to identify the likely impacts on environmental resources of the proposed plan activities. The

indicators used in this research of environmental sensitivity differ from those used in other SEA studies such as

Eirgrid (2011) and CAAS Ltd (2013). It is possible to use other indicators to measure environmental sensitivity.

However, the selected indicators in this research also depend on the expert opinion, the existing

condition/phenomena, the availability of supporting data and whether they are measurable. Meanwhile, the criteria

were explained in order to express the degree of sensitivity, such as the rapid infiltration area is considered sensitive

to water recharge, while low infiltration is considered low sensitive. Another example is the higher coliform



concentration is considered highly sensitive to the groundwater quality. Those selected indicators and classification

of environmental sensitive criteria were obtained by semi-structured interview and the relevant

standard/regulation. If the sensitive criteria are not available through standard/regulation, the judgement from an

expert is useful to identify the criteria of the degree sensitivity which expressed by an index which classified in four

(4) classes (i.e. non-sensitive-low, medium and high sensitivity).

However, this approach has a high subjectivity, because only one expert were involved to design the sensitivity

criteria and indicators of each selected environmental resources. Therefore, expert judgement has bias potency

based on their experience and knowledge. To overcome this obstacle, the judgement was also supported by related

standard / regulation in describing sensitivity and concentrated to the environmental issues in the existing situation.

Meanwhile, more experts involved in the process will reduce the bias and can fosters sharing information /

education between experts (Okoli and Pawlowski, 2004). Therefore, it is recommended to involve several experts

in one field which can lead to a more objective judgement in assigning the criteria, indicators and scoring.

The criteria and indicators which obtained from expert knowledge and related standard were depicted into map

feature to identify the most sensitive area of each environmental resources which is explained by sensitivity index.

The mapping of environmental sensitivity of each selected resources including the expert judgement of indicators

are provided in the below section.

4.2 Environmental Sensitivity Indicator Index Mapping

In order to measure the environment sensitivity in Yogyakarta-Sadeng corridor, a sensitivity index map was

produced for each resource. Environmental sensitivity maps are generated digitally using GIS software, and

contain various categories of indicators. Each indicator is significant in defining the sensitivity of an area and

describing the current condition. Since the spatial plan of Yogyakarta-Sadeng corridor is prepared for the year of

2012-2032, therefore the assessment was also considered using the datasets of 2011 and 2012.

According to the map availability of vector datasets from the relevant institution, vector data sets were applied in

this research. Various data sets also consist as an indicator to indicate sensitive area. Thus, classification and scoring

of the indicator were adopted to generate the sensitivity index maps. According to experts’ opinion, all the

sensitivity criteria were reclassified as non-sensitive with a score one (1) to high sensitivity with score four (4).

4.2.1 Karst Ecosystem

According to the expert judgement (ID8), the indicators to measure the sensitivity of Karst region are the types of

exokarst (surface karst) and endokarst (subsurface karst) which was delineated in to land use. The corridor area of

Yogyakarta-Sadeng ranging from Semanu to Sadeng is designated as a geological protected area, associated with

the presence of karst mountains in this region. This karst region became one of the conservation area in accordance

with Instruction No. 3 of 2010. Sensitive karst area are often characterized by the disruption of karst ecosystem

function (ID8). Therefore, karts region with the characteristic of nature reserve such as cave, spring, lake and under

ground river are classified as high sensitivity. The delineation of land use in the Karst Gunungkidul was provided

by D.I.Y Geology Sector. Meanwhile, scoring of sensitive karst areas was classified by land use types which was

supported by expert judgement. The classes and the delineation were followed as described in Table 12 and

depicted in Figure 8.



29

Table 12: Karst delineation

Land use delineation Sensitivity

Class

Expert Justification Scoring

Karst with illegal mining

activities

High The area with the conservation of karst and illegal

mining activities in this corridor is considered as a

geological protected area. Illegal mining activities

in this karst area will be dismissed due to

protection of ecosystem karst. Meanwhile, land

use of agriculture and housing are considered as

medium sensitive because the activity is not

digging deep to erode many karst layer (ID8).

4

Karst with the

characteristic of nature

reserve (cave, spring, lake,

underground river)

High 4

Karst with housing and

land use mix (housing,

commercial, services)

Medium 3

Karst with agriculture area

3

Karst with legal mining

activities

Low 2

Non Karst area

Non 1

Sources: semi-structured interview 2014

Figure 8: Map of Karst Sensitive Area



The Karst zonation illustrates the area that is allowed for mining activity. The zonation also consist of the

protection of Underground River and other natural reserve areas. This map was used as a basis information to do

the classification of sensitivity according to the expert interview. The map shows the karst sensitive areas. The

activities in this area which are not affected by the existence of karst ecosystem, hence classified as non-sensitive

areas. Meanwhile, the high sensitivity areas are mostly located in Semanu and Ponjong Sub-Districts (see. Figure

8).

4.2.2 Biodiversity

According to the interview with a representative of conservation agency (ID3), biodiversity has become an

important issue in the province level. However, there is only a small fraction of the forest conservation area

(Conservation Park) in Yogyakarta-Sadeng corridor. Therefore, biodiversity becomes less a concern in the spatial

plan of Yogyakarta-Sadeng Corridor. The availability of data and previous study is also minimum compared to

other resources. Such as the identification of biota endemic is only available in the Karts Region, which was

adopted from the biodiversity profile in Karst Gunungkidul. In order to show sensitive areas of biodiversity in

this corridor, expert judgement and forest regulation were applied. Forest areas are classified into different types

and function i.e conservation forest, experimental forest, protected forest and production forest, whereas those

types are also have a function of biodiversity protection. The classification and delineation of biodiversity sensitive

areas are described in Table 13 and depicted in Figure 9.

Table 13: Biodiversity Classification

Biodiversity

protection

Sensitivity Classes Score Expert Justification (ID3)

Conservation forest High 4 Conservation areas are set in the region referred to as a

community forest park (Tahura)

Experimental forest High 4 It should be maintained as forest research with a variety of

plants and animals endemic

Protected forest Medium 3 The function of protected forest is a forest that can protect

the land from flooding, erosion, landslides, and as water

storage.

Production forest Low 2 Production forest is a forest that provides forest products

such as wood, rattan, incense, and other forest products. This

type of forest is less sensitive to flora because of the crops

function.

Biota karst High 4 The unique, as well as the scarcity of endemic, particularly

sensitive to habitat change of biota karst. The identification

of biota endemic in the karst region was obtained from the

biodiversity profile in the karst Gunungkidul.

Marine (coast line) Medium 3 Sadeng coast area has a function in fish producing and the

provision of fish auction. It is considered as medium sensitive

of biodiversity protection due to fisheries and ecological

function. This area needs to be protected from the activities

such as mining and overfishing that can disrupt coastal

biodiversity.

Water surface buffer

zone

Medium 3 The importance of freshwater species, ecosystems and

services to human livelihoods and wellbeing is increasingly

being recognised. Therefore, the protection of riverbank and

springs is also sensitive to the existence of freshwater

biodiversity. The level of sensitivity is stated as medium

sensitive. According to water quality monitoring, the river

quality in 2011 was categorized as medium-high pollutant.

Meanwhile, there was no monitoring activity for spring water

quality. Overall, surface water quality status in Yogyakarta -

Sadeng was at moderate pollution level. Therefore, the



31

Biodiversity

protection

Sensitivity Classes Score Expert Justification (ID3)

presence of freshwater biodiversity status is assumed as

medium sensitive.

Other land uses Non-sensitive 1 Areas without the characteristics of biodiversity. Sources: semi-structured interview 2014

.

Figure 9. Map of Biodiversity Sensitive Area

According to the map in Figure 9, the area with a high sensitivity of biodiversity are mostly located in the karst

area and also in the forest conservation area. The map was obtained from land use map in Yogyakarta-Sadeng

corridor, and biota karst map. These two maps were combined and the sensitivity was classified according to the

judgment from a biodiversity expert.

4.2.3 Water Recharge

Along the corridors of Yogyakarta-Sadeng there are also several protected areas such as water catchment area.

Most of area in Piyungan sub-district is directed as a water catchment area (Bantul District Planning Agency, 2013).

According to the expert interview, rapid development in the recharge area of the Yogyakarta groundwater basin

has increase the change of forest and agricultural land into the dwelling, housing, offices, industries, hotels (ID8).

The indicator used to delineate water recharge area was based on the permeability of soil through an infiltration

level (ID8). The highest level of infiltration or the rapid infiltration area is considered as the area with a high

sensitivity to water recharge (ID8). The assessment of map of water recharge area was performed in regional level

which was provided by Geology Sector of D.I.Y Province. Several criteria have been used to identify the

permeability such as soil type, deep, slope, geomorphology type and land use type. The classification and the

delineation of the water recharge sensitive area are described in Table 14 and depicted in Figure 10.



Table 14: Soil infiltration standard

Infiltration Level Sensitivity Classes Score

Rapid High 4

Moderate rapid Medium 3

Moderately slow Low 2

Slow Non-sensitive 1

Figure 10: Map of Water Recharge Sensitive Area

According to the map, the highest sensitive of water recharge areas are mostly located in the karst zone between

Pojong and Rongkop sub-district. Some areas in Patuk district also categorised as moderate rapid (medium

sensitive) to rapid (high sensitive). Therefore, the forest conservation area also located in Patuk sub-district.

4.2.4 Agriculture

Most of productive agriculture land is converted into urban areas (Yogyakarta Environmental Agency, 2011).

According to the interview result, land conversion of agriculture becomes an important issue in Yogyakarta-Sadeng

Corridor. Agriculture land is the most dominant land use in Yogyakarta-Sadeng Corridor, however due to

designation of the corridor area as economic strategic area, this land is sensitive to changes of different function

(e.g. housing, industry, commercial). Normally, the agriculture land price is low and become a high interest for

housing developers. The effect of massive agriculture land use change is also changes of livelihood or might be

loss of job especially for farmers (ID5). This is a justification by the expert that delineation of agriculture protection

areas could be used as the indicators to measure the sensitivity of agriculture land reduction. The description of

land use types of agriculture in Yogyakarta-Sadeng corridor and the classification of sensitive areas are shown in

Table 15 and depicted in Figure 11.



33

Table 15: Agriculture classification

Agriculture types Sensitivity

Classes

Score Expert Justification (ID5)

Irrigated

Agriculture

High 4 Agriculture land which is utilized as rice field supported with

irrigation facilities. This agriculture type has been protected

according to the law of sustainable agriculture. However, in some

cases, agriculture land conversion often occur for this type of

agriculture due to the availability of water pipe system. Thus, the

developers do not need to build additional water infrastructure.

Rainfed

Agriculture

Medium 3 This type of agriculture is less productive without irrigation support

and characterized by low rainfall (<250-300 mm / year). The

increasing land prices and the increasing residential needs, encourage

the land owner to easily sell their land. It is necessary to find another

water sources alternative and apply water resources management to

improve the agriculture productivity. Therefore, it will minimize the

agriculture land conversion.

Mixed garden

(plantation)

Low 2 Land covered with a mixture of trees and perennial crops such as

coconut, banana and bamboo. It is considered as low sensitive

because mixed garden area, mostly available on a small scale by the

private owner. Therefore, massive conversion is rarely happening.

Non agriculture Non-

sensitive

1 Non agriculture area

Source : semi-structured interview 2014

sThe map shows the highest sensitive area to loss of agriculture land that are mostly located in Berbah sub district

which close to the urban area (Banguntapan sub-district) and will be predicted as urbanized area according to the

draft of Yogyakarta-Sadeng spatial plan.

Figure 11. Map of Agriculture Sensitive Area



4.2.5 Groundwater Pollution

According to the expert interview, the higher groundwater pollutant concentrate is considered as sensitive.

Therefore, groundwater sensitivity index was measured by the pollution level. Coliform concentration was taken

as an indicator for groundwater quality (ID2). It is based on the data of monitoring groundwater quality, that is

most of coliform concentration in the urbanized area of Yogyakarta-Sadeng corridor exceeded the threshold (i.e,

> 50 MPN/100 ml) which can be caused by inappropriate construction of wells and septic tank and the household

waste disposal (Yogyakarta Environmental Agency, 2011). Thus, coliform is mostly measured in monitoring wells

of residential area, as an indicator of faecal contamination Groundwater monitors sampling data as well as the map

of groundwater were provided by local government. The criteria of groundwater quality is based on the standard

which is provided by (Ministry of Health Republic of Indonesia (2002) The pollution standard, classification and

scores are described in Table 16. Table 16: Ground water pollution standard

Indicator Unit Classification Score

Coliform

<50 non polluted Most Probable Number (MPN)/100 ml Low sensitivity 2

>50 high polluted High sensitivity 4

The spatial distribution of groundwater status is presented in Figure 12. The map was obtained from D.I Yogyakarta province and available in provincial scale, thus the map information was simply adjusted with the study area.

Figure 12: Map of Groundwater Pollution Sensitive Area



35

The area of Banguntapan district is more sensitive of groundwater pollution within the high coliforms

concentration above 50 MPN/100 ml. The areas are located in urbanized area of Yogyakarta (Banguntapan,

Berbah, Piyungan, Wonosari). Groundwater in areas of high urban density is more likely to be contaminated by

coliform.

4.2.6 Water Access

According to the expert interview from the representative of water infrastructure unit in Yogyakarta, water access

in Yogyakarta-Sadeng Corridor mainly originates from two main sources, the pipe water and groundwater.

Therefore, pipe water coverage area and groundwater availability (depth) are used as indicator to indicate the

sensitive area of water access (ID7). The pipe water which is operated by the local drinking water provider (PDAM)

does not fulfil the water demand in the whole city. Thus, ground water is used by most people in the area where

ground water is available. However, lack of ground water availability is also becoming an obstacle of water access

in this corridor since most parts of Yogyakarta-Sadeng corridor are non-aquifers. Therefore, some areas are highly

sensitive to the water access (ID7).

The water pipe coverage area is used as parameter to indicate water access in the region of Yogyakarta-Sadeng

corridor. Public works institution and water service provider have responsibility for the provision of the clean

water. The water service provider produce the information of coverage map of water pipe supply. Meanwhile,

aquifer or groundwater depth map was provided by public works institution. The local government still considered

groundwater resources as a supply for clean water because the provision of water pipe system is still limited. The

classification index is shown in Table 17 and Figure 13.

Table 17: Water pipe and groundwater depth classification

Water pipe

Water pipe coverage Classes Score

Served Non sensitive 1

Unserved High sensitivity 4

Ground water

Depth Class Score

< 7 m Non-sensitive 1

7-15 m Low sensitivity 2

15-25 m Medium sensitivity 3

Non Aquifer High sensitivity 4

Water pipe coverage and ground water availability were overlaid to generate a water access sensitive index in this

area. The assessment was done by combining the layers of water pipe coverage area and groundwater depth to see

the coverage sensitive areas for water access.

According to the map (Figure 13), clean water access is mostly available in the Banguntapan, Berbah and Wonosari

sub-district both the availability of ground water and pipe water. Meanwhile, Patuk, Pojong, Rongkop and Girisubo

sub ditrict shows the highest sensitive of water access.



Figure 13: Map of Water Supply Sensitive Area

4.2.7 Air Pollution

According to the expert judgement, the indicator to measure sensitivity of air pollution is the vehicle emission

along the main road corridor Yogyakarta-Sadeng with the parameters of carbon monoxide (CO), grren house gass

emissions including carbon dioxide (CO2), Hydro Carbon (HC) and Particulate Matter (PM). Those indicators

were aggregated into total pollutant index (Pij), whereas “Pij = CO2 + CO + HC + PM”, calculated by the centre

of transportation and logistics in Yogyakarta (see. Appendix 2).

According to the air quality monitoring report 2010-2013 in D.I.Y Province, the contribution of the transportation

sector to the emission/pollutants was still more dominant compared to industrial sector. Transportation (vehicles)

generally contributes significantly to the emissions of CO2 which also gave the highest contribution to the

emissions in Yogyakarta-Sadeng compared to other indicators, while CO become a second highest pollutant in

this region. Monitoring of vehicle emissions was done in 8 (eight) point sampling locations on the main segment

road i.e. Banguntapan, Piyungan, Sambipitu (in Patuk sub district), Gading (in Playen sub-district), Alun-Alun

Wonosari, Baleharojo (in Wonosari sub-district), Semanu and Rongkop. According the calculation of total pollutan

index (Pij), Banguntapan had the highest contribution of pollutants compared to others point sampling location

(Figure 14).



37

Figure 14: Total Pollutan Index (Pij) in the main road of Yogyakarta-Sadeng corridor

Source: (Pustral Yogyakarta, 2012)

The standard of pollutant index is based on Yogyakarta Environmental Agency. Table 18 shows the emission

standard and the classification of pollutant index.

Table 18: Emission Standard and Classification

Total Pollutant Index

(Pij)

Classification Sensitivity Classes Score

>100 Non polluted Non-sensitive 1

100 – 500 Low Polluted Low sensitivity 2

500-1500 Moderate Polluted Medium sensitivity 3

>1500 High Polluted High sensitivity 4 Source: Environmental Agency Decree No. 107 / 1997 and expert judgement (ID6)

In order to mapping a pollutant index. The interpolation methods such as an inverse distance weighted (IDW) was

used to develop air pollution map. However, the limition of this this approach is not consider wind direction which

can affecting of the prediction of polluted areas. The index map of total air pollution is described in Figure 15.

According to the map, Banguntapan, Berbah and Piyungan sub districts have the highest contribution of air

pollutants. According to the spatial plan Yogyakarta-Sadeng Corridor, these areas are categorized as urbanized area

because located close to urban area of Yogyakarta city.

0500

100015002000250030003500

Total Pollutant Index (Pij) (Ton/Year)



Figure 15: Map of Air Pollution Sensitive Area

4.2.8 Soil Erosion

According to the expert interview, soil lost was taken as an indicator to measure the sensitivity of soil erosion.

According to the standard of the Ministry of Forestry, level of erosion was classified based on soil lost

(ton/ha/year). The aggregation of soil erosion in Yogyakarta-Sadeng was provided by soil survey of Yogyakarta

province 2010. Thus, the soil erosion map was provided at the district level which consist of Gunungkidul, Sleman

and Bantul district. They were then adjusted into sub-district level according to study area. According to

Yogyakarta soil study, the indicator of slope (contour), soil type and K erodible have been used to identify the

sensitivity of soil erosion (D.I Yogyakarta Geology Agency, 2012b). Whereas, Yogyakarta-Sadeng corridor doesn’t

have areas with very high erosion rates. This means that the threat of erosion has not been serious in this region.

The classification of soil erosion is explained according to the standard from the Ministry of Forestry Republic of

Indonesia (2009) (see. Table 19). The standard and classification of soil erosion is shown in Table 19 and Figure

16.

Table 19: Soil Erosion Classification

Soil lost Class Level Sensitivity Classes Score

<15 ton/ha/year Very low Non-sensitive 1

15-60 ton/ha/year Low Low 2

60-180 ton/ha/year Medium Medium 3

180-480 ton/ha/year High High 4

>480 ton/ha/year Very High (not available) Source: Ministry of Forestry Republic of Indonesia, 2009 and semi-structured interview, 2014



39

According to the soil erosion map in Yogyakarta-Sadeng corridor, the high sensitive area of soil erosion are located

in Patuk, Ponjong, Rongko and Girisubo district within soil lost around 180-480 ton/ha/year. These areas also

have a high contour, which are also used as one indicator to measure soil erosion.

Figure 16: Map of Soil Erosion Sensitive Area

4.2.9 Population

According to expert interview, population density was used as an indicator to indicate sensitive areas. The

increasing population has put pressure on the physical environment and induced labour migration between rural

areas to the towns which can be an effect to the disruption of social life. High population density area is considered

as the area with a high sensitivity to the physical environment such as safe water, clean air, healthy workplaces and

safe houses (ID4). Population density is the number of people per unit of area, usually quoted per square kilometre

or square mile. According to spatial plan Yogyakarta-Sadeng corridor, the unit area of assessment has been using

sub-district administrative unit. The classification of population density was provided by planning agency of D.I.Y

Province and reclassified into four classes as described in Table. 20 and Figure 17.

Table 20: Population standard and classification

Population Density Classification Reclassification Score

< 5 people/km2 Low Density Non-sensitive 1

5-15 people/km2 Moderate Density Low 2

15-25 people/km2 Dense Medium 3

>25 people/km2 High Density High 4

Source: Statistical agency D.I Yogyakarta, 2012



Figure 17: Map of Population Sensitive Area

The highest population were concentrated in urbanized area such as Banguntapan and Wonosari sub-district.

Meanwhile, the lowest population density were located in a karst area until towards the Sadeng coastal area in

Girisubo sub-district.

4.2.10 Discussion of Environmental Sensitivity Index Mapping

Those of environmental sensitivity (groundwater, air, water supply, agriculture, karst, biodiversity, population,

water recharge and soil erosion) were described as the most sensitive areas according to sub-district administrative

unit in Yogyakarta-Sadeng corridor. Several base maps to generate environmental sensitivity index map were

obtained from D.I Yogyakarta province, yet, not all indicators to measure sensitivity were provided in vector

polygon format, such as air pollution and biodiversity which were provided as points (locations). Therefore,

mapping technique such as interpolation and query were adopted. Nevertheless, there is an uncertainty in

identifying the exact location which can be categorized as environmental sensitive areas. For instance, Inverse

Distance Weighting (IDW) of spatial interpolation schemes was applied in estimating the spatial distribution of

pollutants. It is provided based on the existing air emission monitoring data along the main road corridor.

However, this method was performed without considering wind direction and specific distance from the road

which could be the indicators to measure the spatial distribution of air pollution . Furthermore, there are limited

point measurements (i.e, 8 points) of monitoring the emission that used to interpolate the air pollution for the

whole study area.



41

Several base maps which were provided in vector format were also obtained from the different sources (local

institutions) and scales. These were the obstacles to deal with different data sources. Therefore, the baseline maps

of environmental sensitivity index was prepared to generate Uniform Analysis Zones (UAZ) layers which were

used to produce Cumulative Environmental Sensitivity (CES) index map. All environmental sensitivity maps were

combined to describe the most sensitive area due to overlapping of different types of sensitivity in a region.

4.3 Cumulative Environmental Sensitivity (CES)

In order to explain Cumulative Environmental Sensitivity (CES) spatially, two maps were generated as follows:

- CES for protection: an index to show different CES classes, of which the highly sensitive area can be proposed for protection, thus the environmental resources are: karst ecosystem, water recharges, biodiversity and agriculture sustainable.

- CES for degradation: an index to show different CES classes, of which the highly sensitive area is identified as degraded area, thus the environmental resources are: groundwater quality, water supply /access (pipe water and groundwater), soil erosion, population density and air pollution.

Those maps show the distribution of sensitive areas in Yogyakarta-Sadeng Corridor within the degree of sensitivity

accumulation. In order to generate CES index maps for protection and degradation, map algebra combination

techniques of addition and multiplication and rule-based classification technique as a manual classification

technique were formulated to show the different distribution of the level cumulative sensitivity and were compared

to identify the most suitable technique in representation of CES index. A classified map of CES has been grouped

into four sensitivity classes (i.e. Negligible, Low, Moderate, High). On the map, the different classes can be

distinguished by gradation levels. Where the mapping shows a concentration of environmental sensitivity there is

an increased likelihood that development will conflict with these sensitivity and cause environmental deterioration.

4.3.1 Cumulative Environmental Sensitivity (CES) for Protection

CES map for environmental protection shows the different index of which the highly sensitive area can be

proposed for protection (no plan implementation). The pattern of CES map shows the restrictions of development

in the sensitive areas (Figure. 18). Many protected areas such as karst, forest conservation, water recharge areas

and agriculture in Yogyakarta-Sadeng corridor, need attention from the local government in order to avoid the

conflict.

According to the addition and rule-based techniques, the high sensitivity area are mostly located in the eastern part

where the karst area are located such as Semanu Ponjong, Rongkop and Girisubo (Figure. 18a, 18b and Table.21).

These areas are cumulatively sensitive to protection since there are several functions such as high infiltration,

geology protected and rich in biodiversity. The representation of the high cumulative sensitive area is explained

using different overlay operation and different classification. The different sensitive index can be seen for each

zone, for instance the sub districts in Semanu-Ponjong-Rongkop-Girisubo (eastern part) are mainly categorized as

a medium sensitive through “multiplication” (Figure 18b). Meanwhile, those three sub districts are classified as

high sensitivity area when applying an addition operation (Figure. 18a). Rule based classification shows different

display of the distribution of sensitive areas. There is much more medium to high sensitive areas, especially in the

northern part. Some areas in Playen and Patuk sub-district are also classified as high sensitivity area. It means that

there are more sensitivity criteria that have combination of moderate and high sensitivity scores in the northern

part and the rule setting categorize these areas as high cumulative sensitivity. The northern part has a high

sensitivity especially in agricultural conversion and high infiltration zone. Further, forest conservation is also

located in between Playen and Patuk sub-district within the function of biodiversity protection and high infiltration

zone. (Figure 18c).



a) CES for protection “Addition” b) CES for protection “Multiplication

c) CES for protection “Rule Based”

Figure 18: Map of CES for Protection using Addition (a), Multiplication (b), Rule-Based (c)

The detail distribution of sensitivity classes in sub-district is mentioned in Table 21. The different combination

shows different results in the distribution of sensitive area. Based on addition technique, the Rongkop sub-district

was classified as high sensitivity area (i.e. 2888 ha) while the negligible sensitivity area in this sub-district is only 47

hectare. The classification using rule-based classification also shows that the high sensitivity area is located in

Rongkop sub-district, but the total area of high sensitivity is slightly different from the result of addition technique



43

i.e. 2615 ha. Meanwhile, a multiplication result give a huge difference for the total area of high sensitivity in

Rongkop sub district, which does not has high sensitivity (0 ha). Moreover, the multiplication result also shows

that Rongkop sub-district has many areas that are not sensitive for environmental protection i.e. 3092 ha. The

result is contradictive with addition and rule-based techniques.

Table 21: CES classes for protection in sub-district

No Sub District

Sensitivity Classes and Combination Technique

Negligible (ha) Low (ha) Moderate (ha) High (ha)

Add Multi Rule Add Multi Rule Add Multi Rule Add Multi Rule

1 Banguntapan 1153 1134 954 629 306 742 140 341 226 0 142 0

2 Berbah 21 998 695 1830 1423 1305 264 643 1195 3 149 16

3 Girisubo 43 2954 1 516 2944 68 4066 15 4084 1287 1 1759

4 Patuk 1803 3727 620 3809 1786 2391 296 366 2605 1 31 292

5 Piyungan 2031 2110 937 3231 3071 1049 467 445 3715 5 109 32

6 Playen 3429 2446 1647 1045 1749 1593 149 319 947 3 112 439

7 Ponjong 623 1119 401 253 1828 458 1060 714 1044 2030 306 2063

8 Rongkop 47 3092 33 457 2560 440 2285 26 2591 2888 0 2615

9 Semanu 1816 1922 1558 790 1253 996 37 56 74 820 230 834

10 Wonosari 4002 2931 2158 865 1776 2160 3 161 553 0 2 0

Figure 19 shows the histogram which represents the different distribution by comparing the percentage of

sensitivity classes. The different combination technique shows the different result of the total percentage CES

index in Yogyakarta-Sadeng corridor. According to the histogram of addition technique, around 11,71% in this

corridor is categorized as highly cumulative sensitive area which needs to be protected from the pressure of

development (Figure. 19a), while, 15.96% of high cumulative sensitive area is explained by “rule based classification

(Figure 19c). The different percentage of sensitivity classes by “addition” and “rule based” is not quite high

compared to “multiplication”. The highest difference is shown in “multiplication” that only 4.22% of the total

area in Yogyakarta-Sadeng corridor is classified as high sensitive area (see. Figure 19b).



a) CES Histogram of Addition Value b) CES Histogram of Multiplication Valu

c) CES Histogram of Rule Based Classification

Figure 19: Histogram CES for protection

4.3.2 Cumulative Environmental Sensitivity to Degradation

CES map for degradation shows the different index of which the highly sensitive area is related to an area in which

the environmental condition is already degraded. The classification was done through environmental baseline data

that explain the environmental condition in Yogyakarta-Sadeng corridor. Figure 20 illustrates the environmental

degradation cumulatively through space according to the existing situation in 2011-2012. However, the analysis of

past time series is not conducted in this research. The environmental state in 2011-2012 is used as a basis to identify

the sensitive area which needs to be given more attention such as in infrastructure development. CES index is

depicted on the map to see the different distribution of sensitive area according to the classification.

The map (Figure 20) illustrates that the highly sensitive areas are mostly located in the northern part. Those areas

are categorized as urbanized area (Banguntapan, Piyungan, Berbah and Wonosari sub-district). Table 22, also

shows that the most sensitive areas for degradation are also located in the urbanized area. Similar to the previous

discussion, the classification of CES index is portrayed through different techniques (i.e. addition, multiplication

and rule based). However, the distribution of sensitive area is also different when categorized into sensitivity index.

For instance, most of areas in Piyungan sub district are classified as high sensitivity area through “addition” and



45

“rule based” (Figure 20b and 20c). Meanwhile, according to “multiplication”, most areas in Piyungan sub district

are classified as medium to high sensitive (see. Figure 20b).

a) CES for degradation “Addition” b) CES for degradation “Multiplication”

c) CES for degradation “Rule Based”

Figure 20: Map of CES for degradation using Addition (a), Multiplication (b) and Rule Based (c)



The size of areas classified into different sensitivity classes in each sub-district is also different, depending on the

combination technique used for map algebra. The large differences can be seen in Piyungan sub-district, where

addition technique identified the high sensitivity areas are around 2428 ha, while rule-based technique showed a

slight difference of high sensitivity areas which are 2628 ha. On the contrary, multiplication technique only found

1 ha of high sensitive areas in Piyungan sub-district. Almost the entire of these urbanized areas including Piyungan

does not have a negligible sensitive classes based on addition and rule-based technique. However, multiplication

technique showed quite large negligible sensitivity areas in Piyungan (i.e, 206 ha).

No Sub District




1 Banguntapan 0 28 0 28 29 0 440 624 33 1456 830 1890

2 Berbah 0 49 0 49 1183 31 1182 1092 1170 1981 888 2011

3 Girisubo 3101 75 1046 75 14 4853 14 0 0 0 0 14

4 Patuk 130 2204 0 977 3031 159 4128 452 5048 675 222 703

5 Piyungan 0 206 0 206 2861 3 3100 2667 3103 2428 1 2628

6 Playen 66 240 0 560 1542 135 2971 2182 65 1030 662 1081

7 Ponjong 785 3368 13 2685 453 2315 497 145 752 0 0 888

8 Rongkop 3875 5679 963 1804 0 4716 0 0 0 0 0 0

9 Semanu 718 1080 20 1622 1861 830 1059 522 1864 64 0 749

10 Wonosari 3 34 0 313 1824 17 2628 2688 2926 1926 324 1927

Table 22: CES classes for degradation in sub-district

No Sub District




1 Banguntapan 0 28 0 28 29 0 440 624 33 1456 830 1890

2 Berbah 0 49 0 49 1183 31 1182 1092 1170 1981 888 2011

3 Girisubo 3101 75 1046 75 14 4853 14 0 0 0 0 14

4 Patuk 130 2204 0 977 3031 159 4128 452 5048 675 222 703

5 Piyungan 0 206 0 206 2861 3 3100 2667 3103 2428 1 2628

6 Playen 66 240 0 560 1542 135 2971 2182 65 1030 662 1081

7 Ponjong 785 3368 13 2685 453 2315 497 145 752 0 0 888

8 Rongkop 3875 5679 963 1804 0 4716 0 0 0 0 0 0

9 Semanu 718 1080 20 1622 1861 830 1059 522 1864 64 0 749

10 Wonosari 3 34 0 313 1824 17 2628 2688 2926 1926 324 1927

The differences are also depicted through histogram. Figure 21a, shows 27.34% of the total area are categorized

as highly sensitive to environmental degradation in terms of pollution (air and groundwater), soil erosion, dense

area and water supply. The percentage of high sensitivity class in addition technique does not have a substantial

difference from rule-based technique in which around 30.81% of the total area were classified as high sensitivity



47

(Figure 21b). Meanwhile, the percentage shows differently in multiplication technique (see. Figure 21c) that only

9.7% of the total area in Yogyakarta-Sadeng corridor was categorized as high sensitivity. The highest percentage

in “multiplication” is shown in negligible sensitivity class (i.e. 39.11%).

a) Histogram of CES of degradation (addition) b) Histogram of CES of degradation (multiplication)

c) Histogram of CES for degradation (rule based)

Figure 21: Histogram of CES for degradation

4.3.3 Discussion of Map Algebra Combination and Classification in CES

According to the comparison of map algebra combination between “addition”, “multiplication” and “rule based”,

the distribution and index classes of CES results are different. The different results from classification between

addition and rule-based operation are not quite high. However, multiplication generates a huge difference in the



outcome of the classification. The percentage of low scores in multiplication is quite high compared to the

percentage of low scores in addition and rule based technique (Figure 20 and 21). It is found that the score of one

(1) representing non-sensitive class in the sensitivity criteria had a major effect on the result of multiplication.

Multiplying with the score of 1 will produce a lower cumulative sensitivity score than adding up, especially if there

are a lot of non-sensitive (1) scores to be combined in the same polygon unit. The more values of one in a polygon

area, the lower the cumulative sensitivity level. This finding on the influence of score 1 is depicted in Table 23

which is adopted from the attribute table of CES index map of degradation.

Table 23: Application the score of “one” in addition, multiplication and rule-based

Site Sensitivity on

resources

Calculation Natural breaks classification Sensitivity Classes

a b c d e (+) (x) Addition Multiply Addition Multiply Rule based

A 1 1 4 1 1 8 4 - 4-7:

Negligible

- 8-9:

Low

- 10-11:

Moderate

- 12-15:

High

- 1-18:

Negligible

- 19-36:

Low

- 37-108:

Moderate

- 109-192 :

High

Low Negligible Negligible

B 3 3 2 1 1 10 24 Moderate Low Moderate

C 4 2 2 1 1 10 16 Moderate Negligible Moderate

D 3 2 1 3 1 10 18 Moderate Negligible Moderate

E 1 2 3 4 1 11 24 Moderate Low Moderate

Explanation: The standard of rule-based classification can be seen in Table 9. Chapter 3.4.3

This finding can be explained for instance, site A and B have dominant score of 1, thus after multiplied with other

score criteria, the cumulative score become lower than addition. Therefore, it is affect to the classification result,

which is become much lower than the classification of addition score. Meanwhile, the dominant score also effect

to the classification result through rule-based technique. A rule is established based on the assumption of dominant

score. If the dominant score in a polygon is non-sensitive (1), then the CES classification becomes negligible. This

also applies to the other score. However, if there is mixed/different scores in a polygon (e.g, 1,2,3,4), then the rule

were set as moderately sensitive. Therefore, the percentage of moderately sensitive area in the rule-based technique

is quite high for both types of CES (Figure 20c, 21c). This means that there are many combination score of non-

sensitive, low, medium and high sensitivity in the polygon areas. The highest sensitivity in rule-based classification

also has a high percentage. It means that the high sensitivity score is also dominant in each polygon of CES.

Basically, rule-based classification is a type of normative assessment, which were possible to have inconsistency

and a problem when assigning a rule.

Addition technique seems to work satisfactorily in explaining CES index in this research compared to

multiplication and rule based. The result of multiplication technique is not reliable in explaining cumulative, thus

the different types of sensitivity criteria in this study cannot be multiplied. However in the rule-based classification,

the large number of possible situations could make a complex query process and requires a lot of time to the

analysis. In practice, rule based approach was difficult to implement if there are several polygons areas, several

types of resources and more than four classes of sensitivity. It is often wise to use addition and automatic

classification such as based on “natural breaks method” in order to make a natural class for ease of analysis.

4.3.4 Overall Environmental Sensitivity

The composite environmental sensitivity map were combined both of environment sensitivity for protection and

degradation to identify the most environmental sensitive areas which is already degraded and also has a protection

function. The cumulative score of both environmental sensitivity was combined using addition technique and

classified using “natural breaks classification”. This approach is selected according to the previous discussion that



49

found that these techniques can more represent cumulative sensitivity. The map illustrates varying degrees of

environmental sensitivity. The classification assigns the areas into four classes of overall environmental sensitivity

which is similar to a previous classification (i.e. negligible, low, moderate, high) (Figure. 22)

Figure 22: CES Total Index Map

According to Figure 22, areas with moderate sensitivity levels are spread across locations in Yogyakarta-Sadeng

corridor. While the areas within moderate to high sensitivity levels are widespread in the most sub-districts of

Semanu to Ponjong. In addition, there are also some areas in Patuk sub-district that have moderate to high level

of overall environmental sensitivity. Thus, the areas with the different levels of sensitivity are described in the form

of hectares and percentage of the total area districts (see. Table 24)

Table 24: Total area of overall CES index in the Sub-district

No Sub District CES index

Negligible Low Moderate High Total (ha)

1 Banguntapan 605,4 ha 563,5 ha 507 ha 127,6 ha 1804

34% 31% 28% 7%

2 Berbah 510 ha 980 ha 1369 ha 133 ha 2992

17% 33% 46% 4%

3 Girisubo 1842 ha 3345 ha 726 ha 0 ha 5913

31% 57% 12 % 0 %

4 Patuk 1933 ha 3251 ha 440 ha 286 ha 5910



The overall environmental sensitivity was aggregated for each sub-district which can give alternative / scenario

plan in those areas. Further, it can be described as the most sensitive area for development. Ponjong and Semanu

sub district are the most sensitive area that has cumulative environmental sensitivity for protection as well as

degradation. Table 23 shows that 18% of total sub-district area in Ponjong and 24 % of total sub-district area in

Semanu are classified as high sensitivity. Meanwhile, there is no area with high cumulative sensitivity in Girisubo,

Rongkop and Wonosari sub-districts.

Areas that previously had a high sensitivity to the categories of protection and degradation, somewhat change into

low sensitivity after all resources were combined. It proves that the number of aggregated indicators can affect

different results in explaining a cumulative level of sensitivity. For instance, Rongkop sub-district has an area of

2888 ha of which belong to the high sensitivity to environmental protection, but when combined with other criteria

of the category of environmental degradation, this district no longer has relatively high sensitivity areas. It can be

said that this area does not have a high degree of sensitivity in the category of environmental degradation, which

makes the cumulative level of sensitivity be classified into moderate sensitivity class. Therefore, Rongkop sub-

district has moderate cumulative environmental sensitivity.

Regarding the alternative plan, it can be summarized that the areas which is classified as moderate and high

cumulative sensitivity are considered to be protected from the development (no plan alternative) in order to avoid

the impact resulting from the plan activities. Determination of the alternative plan, depends on the objectives to

be achieved. For example, if the plan activities are placed in Rongkop region, then the function of environmental

protection in this area will be disrupted, but has no impact on the increasing of environmental degradation, such

as increased air pollution or increased concentrations of coliform bacteria in groundwater because the area is still

quite below the threshold level of pollution. Therefore, there is still a trade off in designing the plan alternatives in

order to avoid the impact on environment.

4.4 Prediction of Likely Cumulative Impacts and Conflict Zone

The prediction of likely cumulative impacts on the environment resources is used to analyse whether the proposed

plan by DI Yogyakarta province will have impacts on the resources which make the environmental condition

become worst. The likely cumulative impacts were assessed by the proposed plan activities, such as the land take

by small housing, commercial, industrial and new road developments promoted by D.I Yogyakarta province. This

type of plan is local plan which has options for development. The plan proposes the general allocation of areas for

different land use types, but not detailed as exact locations of individual buildings.

33 % 55 % 7 % 5 %

5 Piyungan 819 ha 2315 ha 2044 ha 217 ha 5395

15 % 43 % 38 % 4 %

6 Playen 2406 ha 1537 ha 536 ha 147 ha 4626

52% 33% 12 % 3%

7 Ponjong 927 ha 1030 ha 1280 ha 730 ha 3967

23% 26% 32% 18%

8 Rongkop 1162 ha 3336 ha 1181 ha 0 ha 5679

20% 59% 21% 0%

9 Semanu 1691 ha 615,4 ha 55 ha 747 ha 3108

54% 20% 2% 24%

10 Wonosari 2599 ha 1898 ha 366 ha 8 ha 4871

53% 39% 8% 0%



51

The plan activities that will be assessed are the land use allocation for housing, industry, commercial mix use with

housing and services as well as the road plan (Figure. 23). The approach after identifying sensitive area was creating

the plan alternatives and evaluate the impacts of different alternatives (Cooper, 2004). Since the plan is already

stated without alternative, the assessment was only based on the proposed plan which was prepared by public

work agency of D.I Yogyakarta province.

Figure 23: Land use plan (economic activities) Yogyakarta-Sadeng Corridor 2012-2032

Impact magnitude depends to large degree on the environmental sensitivity. In order to identify what kind of

potential impact on environmental resources can result from the proposed plan, the criteria to identify the impact

magnitude was developed based on literature review and the assessment result of environmental sensitivity in order

to measure the impact magnitude. Impact magnitude was classified in three levels of low-medium-high, such as

in Morris and Therivel (2001) and Linkov and Ramadan (2004) in the impact assessment method. The different

impact magnitude are generated showing maps of a range of low to high impact: low (green), medium (yellow) and

high (red). In order to identify cumulative impacts, UAZ layers were prepared and created to combine the several

types of impact i.e. water recharge, biodiversity, air pollution and groundwater pollution.

4.4.1 Water Recharge

The approach has been set up to simulate the impact of land-use changes on the water recharge area. Yogyakarta-

Sedeng corridor have potential water recharge area. One of the issues has been discussed is a reduction in water

recharge area because the extension of housing and buildings. Recharge is hindered by human activities including

paving, development, or logging (Hammouri, Al-Amoush, Al-Raggad, and Harahsheh, 2013). These activities can



result in loss of topsoil resulting in reduced water infiltration, enhanced surface runoff and reduction in recharge.

Therefore, the areas which experience reduction of water recharge area were identified as the highly sensitive water

recharge area that overlaps with the proposed plan activities (i.e. urban and commercial development plan of

housing, commercial, industrial and new road).

Impact magnitude will depend on the sensitivity of resources/receptors as shown in Table 25 which was adopted

from the guidance provided in the EIA method by Morris and Therivel (2009). The table shows the query rule of

impact magnitude on water recharge area. This is a relatively simple approach for a type of urban and commercial

development plan to identify the areas that likely experience reduced groundwater recharges and increase in run

off velocities (with floods and erosion risks from rapid storm flows) due to impermeable surfaces.

Table 25: Assessment of magnitude of potential impact on a water recharge area

Magnitude Description High impact The area that has overlap between water-recharge high sensitivity areas (high

infiltration rate) and plan activities.

Moderate impact

The area that has overlap between water-recharge medium sensitivity areas (moderate infiltration rate) and plan activities.

Low impact

- There is no plan activities in the high and/or moderate sensitivity areas.

- The plan activities are located in the non-sensitive and low sensitivity area (low infiltration rate)

The impact assessment was emphasised on the direct impact i.e, the reduction of water recharge area. The highest

conflict zone within the sensitive area is the allocation for housing / residential. Around 13.7 hectares are located

in the high infiltration zones and 29.7 ha are located in the medium infiltration zones (Table 26).

Table 26: Assessment of potential conflict zone in the water recharge area

Proposed plan Water recharge area

High (ha) Medium (ha)

Housing 13.7 293.7

Commercial and services - 3.7

Commercial and housing - 58.6

Industry 0.3 46.6

New road (within 10 m buffer) 7.6 29

The assessment of Table 25 is depicted on the map (see. Figure 24) to show the location of urban development

plan that likely has an impact on the reduction of water recharge function. Thus, the housing plan activity is

predicted to have a high impact on the decreasing of water recharge areas (13.7 ha).



53

Figure 24: Water Recharge Impact Area

According to Figure 24, a high impact on decreasing water recharge areas are mostly located in Wonosari and

Ponjong sub-district. These areas have a potential function as a high infiltration area. Thus, the proposed plan

activities will affect the infiltration function. The impact on a water recharge area will be higher if there is no

mitigation such as technical engineering to reduce and/or eliminate the impact.

4.4.2. Biodiversity

Spatial plans determine the extent and distribution of different land use functions (roads, industrial, commercial

area and residential areas) that cumulatively affect biodiversity. The potential impact on biodiversity is directly

based on biodiversity baseline assessed as biodiversity sensitive area (see. Chapter. 4.2.7). The impact prediction

on biodiversity considered the areas that are categorized as biodiversity protection site and overlap with the

planning area. The impact on biodiversity in this case is described as reduced areas of high biodiversity values.

Table 27 shows the conflict zone between the proposed plan and biodiversity sensitive areas.

Table 27: Assessment of potential conflict zone on biodiversity

Proposed plan Biodiversity Sensitive Areas

High (ha) Medium (ha)

Housing 23.7 ha 105 ha

Commercial and services - -

Commercial and housing - 8.08 ha

Industry - 4.35 ha

New road (10 meters buffer) - 6.9 ha



According to the table assessment of potential conflict zone, the allocation plan for housing has an impact on

biodiversity disruption, around 23.7 ha allocation plan for housing are located in high sensitivity areas of

biodiversity and 105 hectares located in moderate sensitivity areas of biodiversity. The query of impact magnitude

is explained in Table 28 and depicted in Figure 25.

Table 28: Assessment of magnitude of potential impact on a biodiversity

Magnitude Description

High impact The area that has overlap between biodiversity high sensitivity areas and plan

activities.

Moderate impact

The area that has overlap between biodiversity moderate sensitivity areas and plan

activities.

Low impact

- There is no plan activities in biodiversity high and/or medium sensitivity areas.

- The plan activities are located in non-sensitive and low sensitivity areas of

biodiversity.

Figure 25: Biodiversity impact map

The local government of D.I Yogyakarta has been considering the forest delineation as a constraint factor for the

development plan. However, other criteria of the biodiversity sensitive area have been added by author based on

expert consultation (see. chapter 4.1.2.8). Therefore, there are plan activities which are predicted to have potentially

high and moderate impact on biodiversity. According to Figure 26, the impact on biodiversity in Yogyakarta-

Sadeng corridor is not major, because it only occurs in a small part of Semanu sub-district. Thus, the impact area

on biodiversity can evaluate the plan in order to prepare the mitigation or find another alternative location for the

development.



55

4.4.3 Air pollution

In order to assess the air pollution impact, the areas that will be affected by air pollution were identified, which

focused on the air pollution from mobile sources (vehicle). According to the analysis of transportation which was

provided in the spatial plan Yogyakarta-Sadeng corridor 2012-2032, the amount of vehicles along the main road

will increase until 2032 which creates the needs to build an alternative road (new road connection) to fulfil the

road capacity. The new road plan will connect Banguntapan and Patuk sub districts. Meanwhile, according to the

air pollution index (see. Chapter 4.3.7), the area from Banguntapan into Patuk sub districts already has a high level

of air pollution from mobile sources (vehicle). Thus, ES index map of air pollution and the allocation plan of new

road were used as criteria to measure the impact magnitude.

In this research, the air impact on the residential and mixed housing areas was assumed to come from the vehicle

emissions along the main road plan. Specifically, the impact area was assumed to be contained within 500 m

distance from the impact source (main road). Nicolai, 2003 and McConnell, 2006) have found statistically

significant associations between the prevalence of asthma and living close to high volume vehicle roadways (500

m distance). Meanwhile, Gauderman (2007) reported that living within 500 m of a freeway, was associated with

reduced lung function. The 500 m impact area assumption is also based on the monitoring of ambient air quality

in some urban areas of D.I Yogyakarta province which found that the majority of pollutants is usually concentrated

within approximately 500 m radius from busy roadways (Yogyakarta Environmental Agency, 2013).

The impact areas were classified with the different magnitude, Table 29 describes the query of criteria to identify

the impact magnitude and depicted in the impact areas in order to understand the spatial relationship among them

(Figure 26)

Table 29: Assessment of magnitude of potential impact on air pollution


High impact - The residential and mixed housing area, both existing and plan, that overlap with 500

meter buffer from the road (main road and new road).

- 500 meter buffer area with high and medium pollutant concentration according to baseline

and air pollution index 2012.

- The areas where new road development has been proposed. Thus, the pollutant

concentration will be increased especially in the area that already has moderate and high

pollutant concentration.

Moderate

impact

- The residential areas and 500 meter of road buffer are overlapping with the area of low air

pollutant concentration.

- The area of low and moderate pollutant concentration which overlap with the proposed

road plan.

Low impact

- The entire area outside 500 meter buffer from the existing main road.

- The entire area outside new road plan and outside non-residential area.

Within urban areas, traffic is a major source of local variability in air pollution levels in Yogyakarta- Sadeng, with

the highest concentrations and risk of exposure occurring near roads. According to the map, the red colour area

(i.e, located in Banguntapan, Berbah, Piyungan sub-district) is categorized as an area that will be affected by air

pollution.



Figure 26: Air Impact Map

4.4.4 Groundwater pollution

The criteria to identify the impact magnitude on groundwater pollution was elicited such as groundwater pollution

sensitive area (coliform concentration), groundwater aquifer (depth) and the allocation plan of housing and mix

commercial housing. This assumption based on the monitoring of groundwater quality 2012-2013 in D.I

Yogyakarta Province, that most of groundwater in the housing area are often contaminated with the high

concentration of coliform bacteria and most of coliform bacteria are concentrated in the lowest depth of the

aquifer. Coliform contamination of groundwater can be caused by inappropriate location and/or poor

construction of the wells. Further, unconfined aquifer (low and medium groundwater depth can be easily

contaminated due to infiltration of surface waters and wastewaters (Yogyakarta Environmental Agency, 2012). In

such cities of DI Yogyakarta province, pit latrines and leaking septic tanks are the major sources of groundwater

contamination. Therefore, the development of housing without proper sanitations and poor construction of the

wells and septic tanks will likely affect to the increasing of coliform concentration. Since in urban areas, houses are

built close together, so it is not easy to protect the groundwater low depth from the contamination of coliform

bacteria. The groundwater sensitivity of coliform has been discussed and the high pollutant concentration is located

in urbanized areas such as Banguntapan, Berbah and Piyungan Sub-District (see. Chapter 4.2.5).

The query process of impact magnitude on groundwater quality is described in Table 30, whereas, Figure 27

illustrates the areas where predicted have an impact to the increasing of groundwater pollution, especially from the

coliform bacteria.



57

Table 30: Assessment of magnitude of potential impact on groundwater pollution


High impact - Areas of proposed housing, commercial and housing and commercial and

services activities, that overlap with low depth aquifer (< 15 meters) area.

- The areas within high groundwater sensitivity areas (high coliform concentration)

in 2012

Moderate impact

- Areas of proposed housing, commercial and housing and commercial and

services activities, that overlap with the medium depth aquifer (15- 25 meters)

- Areas of proposed housing, commercial and housing and commercial and

services activities with the area of low groundwater sensitivity areas (low coliform

concentration) in 2012

Low impact

- The areas without plan (housing, commercial and housing and commercial and

services activities)

- The entire area within high depth aquifer (> 25 meters and/or non-aquifer)

- The entire area within low coliform concentration.

.

Figure 27: Groundwater impact map

According to Figure 27, the high impact areas on groundwater pollution are located in urbanized area

(Banguntapan and Piyungan sub-district) because these are the areas where housing expansion is planned. The red

coloured areas are considered as high impact on groundwater due to coliform concentration.



4.4.5 Identification of Cumulative Impact

According to the SEA guidelines for land use plan, cumulative impacts can be derived from several plan activities

(e.g. industrial, housing, road) and having a combined impact on environmental resources (e.g. air pollution,

biodiversity) (Cooper, 2004). The assessment of impact prediction on SEA is not deep like EIA. Therefore, the

identification of cumulative impact at the level of spatial plan only mentions the impact distribution as well as the

size of impact area (hectare).

Based on the identification of potential impacts and conflict zones, the proposed plan activities (i.e. housing,

industry, commercial mix use and road) in Yogyakarta-Sadeng corridor have several impacts on environmental

resources (i.e. water recharge area, biodiversity, air pollution, and groundwater pollution). Most of the plan

activities overlap with the highly sensitive areas which can cause conflict, hence the impact is likely to be high. The

receiving environment and all of the impacts on given resources are illustrated in Table. 31 which shows how

potential cumulative impacts occur if the proposed plan activities are implemented.

Table 31: Impact on Environmental Resources

Proposed plan

activities

Environmental Resources / Component

Water recharge area Biodiversity Air Pollution (Emission) Groundwater Pollution

Housing √ √ - √

Industry √ x - -

Commercial mix

housing and

services

√ √ - √

Commercial and

services

√ x - -

Road √ √ √ -

(√) : Affected, (x) : not affected, (-) : not assessed

The allocation plan of housing, industry, commercial and road have an impact on the decreasing of water recharge

areas. Housing and road development plan also has an impact on biodiversity, while the allocation plan of industrial

and commercial and services does not have an impact on biodiversity. The impact assessment of air pollution was

based on vehicle emissions, therefore a new road plan will likely increase air pollution. Meanwhile, the impact on

groundwater pollution are identified only by coliform bacteria which is heavily influenced by the settlement.

Ground water pollution will increase, especially in areas that already exceeds the threshold of pollution and the

area will be planned as housing developments.

In order to describe cumulative impact spatially, UAZ layers were created to combine the different impacts

magnitude. The highest total value of each impact was categorized as a high magnitude of cumulative impact (see.

Figure 28).



59

Figure 28: Cumulative Impact Map

According to the map of cumulative impact, the highest impact areas are shown in the urbanized area i.e.

Banguntapan, Piyungan and Wonosari sub districts (Figure 28). However, if the impact is evaluated according to

the sub-district boundary, only Banguntapan sub-district which has a fairly wide area affected. Around 322 hectares

from the total 1803.4 hectares of plan activities have certain impacts on environmental resources. In other words,

18% of the total area in Banguntapan sub-district are likely predicted have the highest potential cumulative impact

and 31% are considered as moderate impact. However, the other sub-districts (i.e. Playen, Ponjong and Rongkop)

do not have the impact from the proposed plan activities (see. Table 31).

Table 32: Impact area in sub-district level

No Sub -district Impact Magnitude (ha and %)

Low Medium High Total Area

1 Banguntapan 916 ha 565,4 ha 322 ha 1803,4

51% 31% 18%

2 Berbah 2517,4 ha 370,7 ha 104,2 ha 2992,3

84% 12% 3%

3 Girisubo 5875,7 ha 6,5 ha 31 ha 5913,2

99% 0% 1%

4 Patuk 5563,1 ha 257,5 ha 89,3 ha 5909,9

94% 4% 2%

5 Piyungan 4717,5 ha 465 ha 211,7 ha 5394,2

87% 9% 4%



No Sub -district Impact Magnitude (ha and %)

Low Medium High Total Area

6 Playen 4575,3 ha 37,8 ha 13,5 ha 4626,6

99% 1% 0%

7 Ponjong 3932 ha 18,4 ha 16,8 ha 3967,2

99% 0% 0%

8 Rongkop 5648,6 ha 8,3 ha 22 ha 5678,9

99% 0% 0%

9 Semanu 3009,9 ha 73,5 ha 24,2 ha 3107,6

97% 2% 1%

10 Wonosari 4314,6 ha 436,1 ha 120 ha 4870,7

89% 9% 2%

4.4.6 Discussion of Cumulative Impact Assessment

There are elements of subjectivity to the identification of impact indicator as well as the classification of impact

magnitude. However, the UAZs method through overlay mapping was used in order to identify the areas where

the most conflicts between development and environmental sensitive areas would likely occur if unmitigated. Thus,

this approach found that cumulative impact in Yogyakarta-Sadeng corridor will likely occur which derive from

several plan activities (i.e. housing, commercial mix housing, commercial mix services, industry and new road) and

having a combined impact on environmental resources (i.e. groundwater pollution, water recharge areas,

biodiversity and air pollution).

Instead of identifying the high cumulative impact areas, this research shows how GIS overlay can predict

cumulative impact of the various planning activities. There are the advantages of the development of cumulative

impact assessment by applying GIS overlay in this research, such as can identification of interrelationships between

the proposed plan activities and environmental resources. Another advantage is the ability for updating baseline

environment sensitivity and usage for different plan activities. Further, it is also useful in identification of locations

where impacts are greatest or smallest and identification of locations that experience impacts from multiple actions.

However, there are also limitation in the assessment of CI by applying GIS overlay in this research such as

limitation in identify indirect impact. The assessment is only can identify the direct impact such as a decreasing of

water recharge area, loss of protected area with high biodiversity value; area affected by emission and area that can

contribute to the increasing of groundwater pollution.

The usefulness in impact prediction of planning application can give alternative for mitigation aspects. For

instances, the impact on a water recharge area will be high if there is no mitigation with regard to the application

of technical engineering (e.g. building infiltration wells). The mitigation to eliminate the impact can be identified

through zoning regulation or building restriction (Ministry of Public Work Repubilc of Indonesia, 2006). For

instance, the implementation of Building Coverage Ratio (BCR) and / or the requirements of building the

infiltration wells in the moderate and high impact on water recharge.

Furthermore, the proposed land use plan allocation can be evaluated whether the allocation plan should be changed

or finding another alternative location for the development to avoid the adverse impact resulting from the various

activities.



61

5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

This chapter summarizes the aim and purpose achieved in the study. It provides the conclusion and discussion of the main findings for

each of the research objectives. This chapter concludes with the recommendation for future research.

5.1 Determination of Criteria and Indicators Based on Expert Judgement

This research demonstrates the identification of environmental sensitivity by selecting appropriate environment

resources based on local issues of concern. In order to identify the sensitivity of environmental resources, the

indicators and criteria have been proposed according to expert judgement and relevant standard, literature or

regulation. There were eleven (11) experts selected from the different background and including the proponent of

Yogyakarta-Sadeng corridor spatial plan. The term of environmental sensitivity has not been familiar in most of

Indonesia regulation. Therefore, this study examined some of the references to obtain a better understanding of

environmental sensitivity to ease discussion with experts.

The type of environmental resources were selected based on the concerned environmental issues in the study area.

Moreover, the selected resources were also discussed with the proponent to be examined for the further

assessment of sensitivity index. Thus, there are nine (9) types of environmental resources which were assessed to

explain the sensitivity index and classified into two types of sensitivity namely sensitivity to environmental

protection (i.e. karts, water recharge area, agricultural, biodiversity and sensitivity to environmental degradation

(i.e. air pollution, groundwater pollution, water access, population, soil erosion). The criteria and indicators were

established to measure the sensitivity index of each resources. However, there were several resources as well as the

indicators which proposed by the expert but not considered in this research due to the lack of supporting data,

particularly for the environmental baseline map. Therefore, the judgment from the experts was used that typically

for utilisation in the technique when there is limited data to indicate criteria sensitivity. Expert judgement is widely

used as a method in EIA and SEA (OECD, 2006). In theory, this is type of qualitative knowledge built through

the experts and be translated into quantitative data of sensitivity score (e.g. non-sensitive (1), low sensitive (2),

medium sensitive (3), high sensitive (4)). Therefore, it was required the experts which have a good level of

substantive experience (i.e. the expert must have a suitable level of knowledge of the problem domain).

5.2 The Classification of Environmental Sensitivity

The environmental sensitivity index was classified according to expert judgement, previous local study and local

standard. Then, it was translated into map to show the high sensitivity area with regards to each of selected

environmental resources. The sensitivity of the receiving environment will vary according to the use of the area

and the characteristic of the environmental resources, thus reclassification of the sensitivity index for all

environmental resources was applied into the same classes (non-sensitive, low, moderate, high). During

classification the sensitivity, the concern on environmental issues should be more emphasized; particularly in an

area that need to protect from the pressure of development as well as an area that has history of environmental

degradation. The classification of environmental sensitivity is more efficient when they are available in the form

of baseline map. Therefore, it is necessary for local government to prepare the environmental baseline spatially.

Then the information can be useful to identify the environmental sensitive areas that can be considered in the

spatial planning.



5.3 Development of Cumulative Environmental Sensitivity (CES) Index

This research illustrates the assessment in generating Cumulative Environmental Sensitivity (CES) which were

provided as an index of sensitivity within the degrees of low to high sensitivity. GIS overlay used to generate

Uniform Analysis Zone (UAZ) layers. The UAZ layers consists of environmental sensitivity indicators and those

indicators are reclassified and scored into the same classes of sensitivity which were obtained from expert

consultation. In order to combine the environmental sensitivity indicator maps to accomplish CES index map, a

map algebra and classification technique (i.e. addition, multiplication and rule based classification) were applied.

Analyses and interpretation of the outputs of CES index and the distribution of sensitivity areas rely deeply upon

examination of the results for changing patterns of sensitivity through those techniques. Thus, this research has

found addition technique is more reliable to represent CES index. Multiplication technique shows substantially

different result between addition and rule based technique which is likely from the influence the presence of score

“1” in the criteria that makes the cumulative scores are become much lower compared to addition. Scoring of

sensitivity criteria was assigned according to the subjectivity judgment. Thus, care must be given when assigning

the numerical scores to different sensitivity levels. Meanwhile, rule based classification were applied according to

the normative assumption in classifying the sensitivity thus the result is very sensitive to the arbitrary decision on

the rules. Examining the sensitivity score is essential to see the potential impacts of a plan because the high

cumulative sensitivity class needs more consideration to be developed than the low cumulative sensitivity class.

Therefore, the selection of high cumulative sensitivity areas leads to mitigation plan development.

5.4 Implementation of Cumulative Impact Assessment (CIA)

This research has discussed whether the proposed plan activities have the implication to the environmental

resources that indicate the conflict between the development plan and the environmental sensitive areas. The

potential environmental impacts may arise from implementation of the new plan development in Yogyakarta-

Sadeng corridor. This research found that environment sensitivity assessment is useful to identify likely impacts

resulting from implementing the plan activities. The assessment shows that the proposed plan allocation of

housing, industry, mix commercial and housing, mix commercial and services and new road) will be conflicted

with the environmental sensitive area such as air, ground water, water recharge and biodiversity. The assessment

found that all the proposed allocation plan have an impact on decreasing water recharge areas. The allocation for

housing also has an impact on reducing the sensitive area which has a biodiversity function, however industrial

and commercial plan doesn’t have an impact on biodiversity because it doesn’t overlap with biodiversity sensitive

area.

This research found that the implementation of UAZ could illustrate cumulative impact spatially, in order to

identify the areas that have accumulation of impacts from the various plan activities. The assessment of cumulative

impact showed that the proposed plan in Yogyakarta-Sadeng corridor are contributing to several environmental

impacts on water recharge, air pollution, groundwater pollution and biodiversity. The location that has a high

cumulative impact magnitude is likely to predict in Banguntapan sub-district. Even though, there are elements of

subjectivity in identify the impact indicators and classify the impact magnitude, however this approach attempts

to overcome the research problem that most of cumulative impact assessment in SEA spatial plan in Indonesia

were conducted qualitatively (e.g. matrix, causal analysis) without clear spatial indication.

5.6 Research Limitations

There are several limitations in this research which can be summarized as follows:

Primary data collection did not conduct a meeting with all the experts together. The experts interviewed

were only represented by one person from the relevant institution which makes a high level of subjectivity

in the judgement of criteria, indicators and scoring the sensitivity.



63

During interview, the concept of environmental sensitivity is unfamiliar to the local experts and the SEA

regulation in Indonesia also does not cover this term. Thus, it may lead to the different interpretation of

sensitivity.

Several criteria and indicators of environmental sensitivity which was proposed by experts are not

supported by data availability. This caused the reduction of indicators during the process.

Several baseline maps with the variety of different sources and scales are greatly influence to the accuracy

of the final result.

The criteria and classification of the impact magnitude were created without consultation with the expert,

which can lead to the uncertainty in identification of the impact magnitude.

Cumulative impact assessment mostly consider different time of past, present and future activities

(Cooper, 2004), but this research did not consider past activities.

5.7 Future Research Recommendations

Considering the limitation of this research, there are several recommendations for the future research.

In order to explain the cumulative environmental sensitivity, further research can incorporate other criteria

and indicators of environmental sensitivity.

This research only discuss the cumulative impact on groundwater, air pollution, biodiversity and water

recharge area. Further research can explore to assess other impacts on environment in relation with

environmental sensitivity.

More research should be undertaken on developing different methods to implement cumulative

assessment spatially, which is currently lacking in the literature.

Finally, similar research can be conducted in other types of spatial plan to see whether the method used

in this research is appropriate to implement in order to get a better understanding of cumulative

environment sensitivity and cumulative impact assessment in the application of SEA.



List of References

Antunes, P., Santos, R., & Jordão, L. (2001). The application of Geographical Information Systems to determine

environmental impact significance. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 21(6), 511–535. doi:10.1016/S0195-9255(01)00090-7

Atkinson, S. F., & Canter, L. W. (2011). Assessing the cumulative effects of projects using geographic information systems. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 31(5), 457–464. doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2011.01.008

Bantul District Planning Agency. (2013). Spatial Planning Bantul District 2013. Boroushaki, S., & Malczewski, J. (2010). Using the fuzzy majority approach for GIS-based multicriteria group

decision-making. Computers & Geosciences, 36(3), 302–312. doi:10.1016/j.cageo.2009.05.011 CAAS Ltd. (2013). Strategic Environmental Assessment Scoping Report for the Longford County Development Plan. CEC. Directive 2001/42/EC on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the

environment, Pub. L. No. 197, 21 July (2001). Council of the European Communities. CEC. Directive 2007/2/EC, of 14th March, establishing an infrastructure for spatial information in the

European community (INSPIRE) (2007). European Union. Cooper, L. M. (2004). Guidelines for Cumulative Effects Assessment inSEA of Plans. Cooper, L. M. (2011). CEA in policies and plans: UK case studies. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 31(5),

465–480. doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2011.01.009 D.I Yogyakarta Geology Agency. (2012). Soil Erosion and Landslide Vulnerability in Yogyakarta Province (in Indonesia)

(p. 35). D.I.Y Public Works and Residential Agency. (2013). Draft of Spatial Plan Yogyakarta-SadengCorridor (in Indonesia). Davis, B. E. (2001). GIS: A visual approach. Cengage Learning. Del Campo, A. G. (2008). Incorporating spatial data and GIS to improve SEA of land use plans: opportunities

and limitations: case studies in the Republic of Ireland. Doctoral, 3. DIY Planning Agency. (2010). Spatial Planning of Yogyakarta Province  : Indonesia (p. No. 2). Dusik, J. (2010). Making SEA fit for political culture of strategic decision-making: Recommendations for General Technical

Guidance on SEA in Indonesia. EC. (2009). Impact Assessment Guidelines. Eirgrid. (2011). Environmental Report for the Grid25 Implementation Programme 2011-2016 Strategic Environmental

Assessment. ESRI. (2008). Classification Methods. Retrieved from

http://webhelp.esri.com/arcgisdesktop/9.2/index.cfm?TopicName=Classification_methods Exelisvis.com. (2015). Rule-Based Classification. Retrieved from

http://www.exelisvis.com/docs/Rule_Based_Classification.html Fergusson, M., & Wilkinson, D. (1995). LGMB Indicators for Sustainable Development: A Step by Step Guide.

In Second draft, IEEP. London. Gauderman. (2007). Effect of exposure to traffic on lung development from 10 to 18 years of age: A cohort

study, 369, 571–577. Gonzalez, A., Gilmer, A., Foley, R., Sweeney, J., & Fry, J. (2005). New Technologies Promoting Public

Involvement: An Interactive Tool to Assist SEA. In Unpublished paper presented at the International Association for Impact Assessment Special Event–SEA Conference (Vol. 26).

González, A., Gilmer, A., Foley, R., Sweeney, J., & Fry, J. (2011). Applying geographic information systems to support strategic environmental assessment: Opportunities and limitations in the context of Irish land-use plans. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 31(3), 368–381.

Halton Region Planning and Public Works Department. (2005). Halton Region Environmentally Sensitive Areas Consolidation Report.

Hammouri, N., Al-Amoush, H., Al-Raggad, M., & Harahsheh, S. (2013). Groundwater recharge zones mapping using GIS: a case study in Southern part of Jordan Valley, Jordan. Arabian Journal of Geosciences, 7(7), 2815–2829. doi:10.1007/s12517-013-0995-1

Klosterman, R. E. (1999). The what if? Collaborative planning support system. Environment and Planning B, 26, 393–408.

Klosterman, R. E., & AKRON, O. (2001). Paper 10 The What If? Planning Support System. Planning Support Systems-Integrating Geographic Information Systems, Models, and Visualization Tools, ESRI Press, Redlands, CA.



65

Kreske, D. L. (1996). Environmental Impact Statements. A Practical Guide for Agencies, Citizens and Consultatants. Kuenzli, P., Verbeet, M., Aaken, J. van, Lamberts, L., Uden, B. van, Selling, P. van, … Deugd, B. de. (2009).

Regional Development Strategies of Twente Airport and Surroundings (p. 146). Province of Overijssel. Linkov, I., & Ramadan, A. B. (2004). Comparative risk assessment and environmental decision making (Vol. 38). Springer

Science & Business Media. Lu, G. Y., & Wong, D. W. (2008). An adaptive inverse-distance weighting spatial interpolation technique.

Computers & Geosciences, 34(9), 1044–1055. McConnell. (2006). Traffic, Susceptibility and Childhood Asthma. Environmental Health Perspectives, 5:776-772. Ministry of Environment Republic Indonesia. (2007). SEA Hand Book ( in Indonesia). Ministry of Environment Republic Indonesia. (2012). Quality Assurance Report SEA for Spatial Plan for Tasikmalaya

District (p. 18). Jakarta. Ministry of Environment Republic of Indonesia. SEA General Guidance: Pedoman Umum KLHS, Pub. L. No.

9 (2011). Indonesia. Ministry of Environment Republic of Indonesia. EIA Guidance Revision  : Revisi Pedoman Penyusunan

Dokumen Lingkungan Hidup, Pub. L. No. 16 (2012). Indonesia. Ministry of Environment Republic of Indonesia. (2012b). Quality Assurance Report SEA for Spatial Plan for Kebumen

District (p. 20). Ministry of Forestry Republic of Indonesia. Procedures for Rehabilitation Engineering Forest and Watersheed

Land (in Indonesia), Pub. L. No. P. 32/MENHUT-II (2009). Indonesia. Retrieved from http://www.rimbawan.com/images/stories/aturan-pdf/P.32 Menhut-II 2009.pdf

Ministry of Health Republic of Indonesia. Groundwater Quality Standards (in Indonesia), Pub. L. No. 907/Menkes/SKVII/2002 (2002). Indonesia.

Ministry of Public Work Repubilc of Indonesia. Building Regulation, Pub. L. No. 29/PRT/M (2006). Indonesia. Morris, P., & Therivel, R. (2001). Methods of environmental impact assessment (Vol. 2). Taylor & Francis. Morris, P., & Therivel, R. (2009). Methods of Environmental Impact Assessment 3RD Edition (3rd editio., p. 577).

London and Newyork: Taylor & Francis. Nicolai. (2003). Urban traffic and pollutant exposure related to respiratory outcomes and atopy in a large sample

of children. European Respiratory Journal, 21, 956–963. OECD. (2006). Applying Strategis Environmental Assessment . Good Practice Guidance For Development Co-operation. Okoli, C., & Pawlowski, S. D. (2004). The Delphi method as a research tool: an example, design considerations

and applications. Information & Management, 42(1), 15–29. doi:10.1016/j.im.2003.11.002 OPDM. (2005). A Practical Guide to the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive (p. 78). Partidario, M. R. (1998). Significance and the Future of Strategic Environmental Assessment. Paper presented at an

International Workshop on Strategic Environmental Assessment, Tokyo. Pustral Yogyakarta. (2012). Air Pollution from Mobile Source in the Main Road Yogyakarta-Sadeng Corridor. Ralf Aschemann, Thomas Jahn, Maria Rosario Partidario, B., & Sadler, R. V. (2011). Handbook of Strategic

Environmental Assessment. Republic of Indonesia. Environmental Law No. 32 / 2009 regarding Environmental Management and

Protection, Pub. L. No. 32 (2009). Indonesia. Sadler, B. (2011). Handbook of Strategic Environmental Assessment. (Earthscan.). London. Scott, P., & Marsden, P. (2003). Development of Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Methodologies for Plans and

Programmes in Ireland. Steadman, E. J., Mitchell, P., Highley, D. E., Harrison, D. J., Linley, K. A., Macfarlane, M., & McEvoy, F. (2004).

Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) and future aggregate extraction: in the East Midlands Region. Keyworth Nottingham: British Geological Survey. Online Availabe at: Http://www. Mineralsuk. com/britmin/CR_04_003N. Pdf.

Sydor, M. W., & Hausmann, P. E. (2007). Method and system for assessment and determining environmental risk for parcels. Google Patents. Retrieved from http://www.google.com/patents/US20070260401

Therivel, R. (2010). Strategic environmental assessment in action. Routledge. Thérivel, R., Caratti, P., Partidärio, M. do R., Theodórsdóttir, Á. H., & Tyldesley, D. (2004). Writing strategic

environmental assessment guidance. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 22(4), 259–270. Vicente, G., & Partidário, M. R. (2006). SEA – Enhancing communication for better environmental decisions.

Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 26(8), 696–706. doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2006.06.005



Vukicevic, J. S., & Nedovic-Budic, Z. (2012). GIS Based Multicrteria Analysis in Integration of SEA Process Into Planning, Case Study: South West Region, Republic of Ireland. International Journal of Environmental Research, 6(4), 1053–1066.

Warner, M. (1996). Integration of regional land use planning with environmental impact assessment: a practical land suitability assessment approach. Impact Assessment, 14(2), 155–189. doi:10.1080/07349165.1996.9725895

Wong, D. W., Yuan, L., & Perlin, S. A. (2004). Comparison of spatial interpolation methods for the estimation of air quality data. Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology, 14(5), 404–415.

Yaakup, A., Bakar, A., Zalina, S., & Sulaiman, S. (2004). Integrated land use assessment (ILA) for planning and monitoring urban development.

Yogyakarta Environmental Agency. (2011). State of Environment DIY Province. Yogyakarta Environmental Agency. (2012). Monitoring of Groundwater Quality in D.I.Y Province 2012-2013 (in

Indonesia) (p. 54). Yogyakarta Environmental Agency. (2013). Testing and Monitoring Emissions / Air Pollution Due to Mobile Source

Urban Transport Activity (p. 45). Yogyakarta Province.

AS

SE

SS

ING

CU

MU

LAT

IVE

E

NV

IRO

NM

EN

T

SE

NS

ITIV

ITY

AN

D C

UM

ULA

TIV

E I

MP

AC

T I

N S

TR

AT

EG

IC E

NV

IRO

NM

EN

TA

L A

SS

ES

SM

EN

T (

SE

A)

(C

AS

E S

TU

DY

: Y

OG

YA

KA

RT

A-S

AD

EN

G

CO

RR

IDO

R)

67

Ap

end

ix. A

: S

emi-

Str

uct

ure

d I

nte

rvie

w

Gu

idin

g s

tru

ctu

re o

f th

e in

terv

iew

s/F

GD

wit

h t

he p

rop

on

en

t (S

pati

al p

lan

nin

g d

ivis

ion

, P

ub

lic w

ork

s ag

en

cy)

In

tro

duct

ion

The

ob

ject

ive

of

sem

i st

ruct

ure

d inte

rvie

w a

re:

To

kno

w the

pla

nnin

g p

roce

ss a

s w

ell as

SE

A p

roce

ss in

Yo

gya

kar

ta-S

aden

g c

orr

ido

r d

etai

led

pla

n.

To

dis

cuss

whet

her

ther

e is

an a

sses

smen

t o

f cu

mula

tive

envir

onm

enta

l se

nsi

tive

and

cum

ula

tive

envir

onm

enta

l im

pac

t in

the

SE

A.

To

dis

cuss

the

dem

and

of

eco

no

my

activitie

s.

To

dis

cuss

the

pro

po

se e

nvir

onm

enta

l se

nsi

tivity

ind

icat

or

and

typ

e o

f en

vir

onm

enta

l b

asel

ine

whic

h a

lrea

dy

cond

uct

ed in

the

spat

ial p

lan.

1.

In w

hat

sta

ge

the

pre

par

atio

n p

roce

s o

f R

TR

KSP

Ko

rid

or

Yo

gya

-Sad

eng a

re?

2.

Was

the

SE

A in

tegra

ted

into

a p

lannin

g a

pp

roac

h o

r w

as it

co

nd

uct

ed a

s a

sep

arat

e ex

erci

se?

3.

What

sta

keh

old

ers

wer

e in

vo

lved

in t

he

det

erm

inat

ion o

f key

iss

ues

to

be

add

ress

ed in

the

SE

A a

nd

ho

w w

as t

hey

co

ntib

utio

n in t

his

pla

n?

4.

What

are

the

exis

ting e

nvir

onm

enta

l is

sues

bei

ng a

dd

ress

ed in

this

pla

n?

5.

In y

our

per

spec

tive,

what

is t

he

envir

onm

enta

l se

nsi

tivity?

6.

Did

yo

u a

lso

co

nsi

der

the

cum

ula

tive

envir

onm

enta

l se

nsi

tive

ind

ex in

this

sp

atia

l p

lan?

7.

Did

yo

u c

onsi

der

the

envir

onm

enta

l se

nsi

tive

area

in Y

ogya

kar

ta-S

aden

g C

orr

ido

r? A

nd

ho

w y

ou c

ond

uct

envir

onm

enta

l sen

sitive

area

in t

he

pla

nnin

g

asse

ssm

ent?

8.

What

kin

d o

f en

vir

onm

enta

l co

mp

onen

t b

eing a

dd

ress

ed in

this

pla

n?

9.

What

so

urc

es o

f in

form

atio

n w

ere

use

d w

hen

gat

her

ing t

he

envir

onm

enta

l b

asel

ine

10.

Did

yo

u c

onsi

der

cum

ula

tive

imp

act

asse

ssm

ent

for

the

pro

po

sed

pla

n?

If it

yes

, ho

w it

was

ass

esse

d?

11.

What

are

the

dem

and

fo

r ec

ono

mic

act

ivitie

s in

Yo

gya

kar

ta-S

aden

g C

orr

idor?

12.

What

typ

e o

f in

dust

rial

pla

n t

hat

ap

pro

pri

ate

in Y

ogya

kar

ta-S

aden

g C

orr

ido

r?

13.

Ho

w b

ig the

scal

e o

f co

mm

erci

al s

ervic

es p

lan in Y

ogya

kar

ta-S

aden

g C

orr

idor?

a.

a.

co

ver

ed the

entire

city

(lar

ge

scal

e)

[

] o

r

b.

only

co

ver

ed the

surr

ound

ing c

om

mer

cial

are

a (s

mal

l sc

ale)

[ ]

Ass

um

ptio

n: if

co

ver

ed w

ith the

smal

l sc

ale

of

com

mer

cial

, it

can b

e as

sum

e th

at n

o infl

uen

ce t

o the

envir

onm

enta

l se

nsi

tivit

y.

14.

What

kin

d o

f th

e en

vir

onm

enta

l re

sourc

es t

hat

im

po

rtan

t to

ase

esse

d a

cco

rdin

g to

sen

sitivity

asp

ects

in t

he

rela

tio

n w

ith e

nvir

onm

enta

l is

sues

in t

he

stud

y ar

ea?

Giv

e si

gn √

to

mar

k the

answ

er in

the

tab

le 1

.

15.

What

kin

d o

f p

lan a

ctiv

itie

s th

at p

rio

rities

to

dev

elo

p a

cco

rdin

g to

the

eco

no

mic

dev

elo

pm

ent in

this

co

rrid

or?

AS

SE

SS

ING

CU

MU

LAT

IVE

E

NV

IRO

NM

EN

T

SE

NS

ITIV

ITY

AN

D C

UM

ULA

TIV

E I

MP

AC

T I

N S

TR

AT

EG

IC E

NV

IRO

NM

EN

TA

L A

SS

ES

SM

EN

T (

SE

A)

(C

AS

E S

TU

DY

: YO

GY

AK

AR

TA

-SA

DE

NG

CO

RR

IDO

R)

Tab

le.1

Envir

onm

enta

l R

eso

urc

es a

nd

Key

Iss

ues

Gu

idin

g s

tru

ctu

re o

f th

e in

terv

iew

s w

ith

wate

r se

cto

r W

ate

r -s

up

ply

Is

wat

er s

up

ply

an im

po

rtan

t is

sue

in Y

ogya

kar

ta?

Yes

:

N

o:

Arg

um

enta

tio

n:

Can

the

gro

und

wat

er a

quif

er b

eco

me

an in

dic

ato

r o

f w

ater

pro

vis

ion in

dep

end

ently

by

the

citize

ns?

Y

es:

N

o:

Arg

um

enta

tio

n:

Can

the

area

with n

on-a

quif

er c

ateg

ori

zed

as

ver

y se

nsi

tive

to w

ater

pro

vis

ion?

Y

es:

N

o:

Arg

um

enta

tio

n:

Do

yo

u a

gre

e w

ith t

hes

e fo

llow

ing g

roup

s /

cat

ego

ries

of

ind

icat

or

and

cri

teri

a b

ello

w to

def

ine

the

sensi

tive

area

on w

ater

sho

rtag

e in

Yo

gya

kar

ta-S

aden

g?

Giv

e yo

ur

argum

ent an

d s

ign *

to

mar

k y

our

answ

er!

En

vir

on

men

tal re

sou

rces

Sig

n

Str

ate

gic

Iss

ues

Wat

er q

ual

ity

Wat

er a

cces

s

Air

po

llutio

n

Geo

logy

Wat

er r

echar

ge

Bio

div

ersi

ty

Oth

ers,

,,

AS

SE

SS

ING

CU

MU

LAT

IVE

E

NV

IRO

NM

EN

T

SE

NS

ITIV

ITY

AN

D C

UM

ULA

TIV

E I

MP

AC

T I

N S

TR

AT

EG

IC E

NV

IRO

NM

EN

TA

L A

SS

ES

SM

EN

T (

SE

A)

(C

AS

E S

TU

DY

: Y

OG

YA

KA

RT

A-S

AD

EN

G

CO

RR

IDO

R)

69

Ind

icato

rs o

f va

lued

reso

urc

es

Su

b-i

nd

icato

rs

Cri

teri

a

Sen

siti

vity

A

gre

e

Dis

ag

ree

Arg

um

en

tati

on

Wat

er

Gro

un

dw

ater

pro

du

ctiv

ity

Aqu

ifer

(gro

un

dw

ater

dep

th lev

el)

Hig

h d

epth

of

gro

un

dw

ater

is

con

sid

ered

sen

siti

ve

to w

ater

sup

ply

pro

vis

ion

Wat

er p

ipe

sup

ply

C

over

age

area

of

pip

e

wat

er s

up

ply

Are

as w

ith

les

s co

ver

age

by

pip

e

wat

er s

up

ply

pro

vis

ion

is

con

sid

ered

sen

siti

ve

Oth

er i

nd

icat

or

to m

easu

re t

he

sen

siti

vit

y o

f w

ater

su

pp

ly/

acce

ss

:

Arg

um

enta

tio

n:

Gu

idin

g s

tru

ctu

re o

f th

e i

nte

rvie

ws

wit

h e

nvir

on

men

tal

secto

r/ex

pert

an

d t

ran

spo

rt e

xp

ert

Air

qu

ali

ty

Is t

he

air

qual

ity

an im

po

rtan

t is

sue

in t

he

Yo

gya

kar

ta-S

aden

g c

orr

ido

r?

Yes

:

N

o:

Arg

um

enta

tio

n :

Are

ther

e an

y p

revio

us

stud

y in

id

entifi

catio

n o

f ai

r p

ollu

tant

zones

in Y

ogya

kar

ta-S

aden

g c

orr

ido

r?

Yes

:

No

:

If t

he

answ

er is

yes,

is

the

rese

arch

als

o c

onsi

der

win

d d

irec

tio

n in t

he

del

inea

tio

n o

f ai

r qual

ity

zones

?

If t

he

answ

er is

no

, co

ntinue

to t

he

nex

t se

ctio

ns.

What

are

the

par

amet

er t

o d

efin

e th

e se

nsi

tive

area

by

air

po

llutio

n?

Bet

wee

n t

he

mo

bile

and

sta

tio

nar

y so

urc

es o

f p

ollu

tant, w

hic

h o

ne

is t

he

mo

st d

om

inan

t so

urc

es o

f p

ollu

tio

n in t

he

rese

arch

are

a?

Arg

um

enta

tio

n:

What

are

the

par

amet

er t

o d

efin

e th

e se

nsi

tive

area

by

air

po

llutio

n f

rom

sta

tio

nar

y so

urc

es (

ind

ust

ry)?

Is t

he

air

po

llutio

n in t

he

stud

y ar

ea a

lrea

dy

exce

eds

the

thre

sho

ld?

Yes

:

No

:

Arg

um

enta

tio

n:

AS

SE

SS

ING

CU

MU

LAT

IVE

E

NV

IRO

NM

EN

T

SE

NS

ITIV

ITY

AN

D C

UM

ULA

TIV

E I

MP

AC

T I

N S

TR

AT

EG

IC E

NV

IRO

NM

EN

TA

L A

SS

ES

SM

EN

T (

SE

A)

(C

AS

E S

TU

DY

: YO

GY

AK

AR

TA

-SA

DE

NG

CO

RR

IDO

R)

Do

yo

u a

gre

e w

ith t

hes

e fo

llow

ing g

roup

s /

cat

ego

ries

of

ind

icat

or

and

cri

teri

a b

ello

w t

o d

efin

e th

e se

nsi

tive

area

of

air

qu

ality

in Y

ogya

kar

ta-S

aden

g?

Giv

e yo

ur

argum

ent

and

sig

n *

to

mar

k y

our

answ

er!

E

nvi

ron

men

tal

reso

urc

es

Ind

icato

rs

Cri

teri

a

Sen

siti

vity

A

gre

e

Dis

ag

ree

Arg

um

en

tati

on

Air

qu

alit

y

Air

p

ollu

tio

n

zo

nes

fro

m m

ob

ile s

ou

rces

- T

raff

ic

level

o

f

mai

n

road

segm

ent

10%

-20%

20%

-40%

40%

-60%

60%

-80%

- B

ou

nd

ary

mai

nro

ad (

0-5

00

m)

Sen

siti

vit

y o

f ai

r qu

alit

y zo

nes

fr

om

mo

bile

so

urc

es p

ollu

tio

n (A

reas

wit

hin

bo

un

dar

y 500 m

fro

m m

ain

ro

ad a

nd

th

e ro

ad s

egm

ent

wit

h

the

hig

h le

vel

of

traf

fic

is co

nsi

der

ed s

ensi

tive

to a

ir q

ual

ity/

emis

sio

n)

Air

p

ollu

tio

n

zo

nes

fro

m

stat

ion

ary

sou

rces

(in

du

stry

)

Dis

tan

ce

to

hea

vy

ind

ust

rial

site

s

Sen

siti

vit

y o

f ai

r qu

alit

y zo

nes

f

rom

sta

tio

nar

y so

urc

es p

ollu

tio

n

(Are

as c

lose

r to

in

du

stri

al s

ites

co

nsi

der

ed m

ore

sen

siti

ve

than

are

as

furt

her

aw

ay f

rom

an

in

du

stri

al s

ites

)

Oth

er i

nd

icat

or

to m

easu

re t

he

sen

siti

vit

y o

f ai

r :

Arg

um

enta

tio

n:

Are

tho

se ind

icat

ors

sup

po

rted

with t

he

avai

lab

ility

of

dat

a?

Gu

idin

g s

tru

ctu

re o

f th

e in

terv

iew

s w

ith

en

vir

on

men

tal se

cto

r W

ate

r q

uali

ty

Is t

he

wat

er q

ual

ity

bec

om

e an

imp

ort

ant is

sue

in Y

ogya

kar

ta?

Yes

: N

o:

Arg

um

enta

tio

n:

Is t

he

esta

blis

hm

ent

of

a b

ound

ary

area

use

ful

for

the

pre

serv

atio

n o

f su

rfac

e w

ater

so

urc

es?

Yes

:

N

o:

Arg

um

enta

tio

n:

AS

SE

SS

ING

CU

MU

LAT

IVE

E

NV

IRO

NM

EN

T

SE

NS

ITIV

ITY

AN

D C

UM

ULA

TIV

E I

MP

AC

T I

N S

TR

AT

EG

IC E

NV

IRO

NM

EN

TA

L A

SS

ES

SM

EN

T (

SE

A)

(C

AS

E S

TU

DY

: Y

OG

YA

KA

RT

A-S

AD

EN

G

CO

RR

IDO

R)

71

What

typ

e o

f th

e d

evel

op

men

t ac

tivity

are

mo

st in

fluen

ces

to the

wat

er s

urf

ace

qual

ity

and

gro

und

wat

er q

ual

ity?

Do

yo

u a

gre

e w

ith t

hes

e fo

llow

ing g

roup

s /

cat

ego

ries

of

ind

icat

or

and

cri

teri

a b

ello

w to

def

ine

the

sensi

tive

area

of

wat

er r

eso

urc

es q

ual

ity

(pro

tect

the

qual

ity

of

wat

er in

the

rela

tio

n o

f cl

ean w

ater

res

ourc

es a

nd

co

nse

rvat

ion)

in Y

og

yakar

ta-S

aden

g?

Giv

e yo

ur

argum

ent an

d s

ign *

to

mar

k y

our

answ

er!

A=

Agre

e, D

= D

isag

ree

E

nvi

ron

men

tal

reso

urc

es

Ind

icato

rs

Sen

siti

vity

Cri

teri

a

A

D

Arg

um

en

tati

on

Wat

er q

ual

ity

Riv

er

Dis

tan

ce fr

om

th

e ri

ver

T

he

area

s cl

ose

r to

th

e w

ater

res

ou

rces

is c

on

sid

ered

m

ore

sen

siti

ve

to w

ater

qu

alit

y th

an i

n a

reas

far

aw

ay f

rom

su

ch

area

s (A

ct N

o. 47 /

1997)

Sp

rin

gs

200 m

aro

un

d s

pri

ngs

Lak

es

50-1

00

m d

ista

nce

fr

om

th

e

lake

bo

rder

Gro

un

dw

ater

qu

alit

y

Co

lifo

rm, E

C,

PH

.

Th

e ar

eas

wit

h t

he

hig

hes

t co

nce

ntr

ate

of

po

lluta

nt

are

con

sid

ered

m

ore

sen

siti

ve.

Are

th

ose

in

dic

ato

rs s

up

po

rted

wit

h t

he

avai

lab

ility

of

dat

a?

Are

ther

e an

y cr

iter

ia o

f w

ater

res

ourc

es in Y

ogya

kar

ta-S

aden

g c

orr

ido

r to

be

consi

der

ed?

Yes

:

No

:

If it

yes,

what

are

the

criter

ia t

o d

efin

e th

e se

nsi

tive

area

in t

erm

s o

f w

ater

qual

ity?

Are

the

ind

icat

ors

sup

po

rted

by

the

avai

lab

ility

of

dat

a?

Gu

idin

g s

tru

ctu

re o

f th

e in

terv

iew

s w

ith

geo

log

y a

nd

so

il e

xp

ert

Geo

log

y a

nd

so

il

Is g

eolo

gy

an im

po

rtan

t is

sue

in Y

ogya

kar

ta-S

aden

g c

orr

ido

r?

Yes

:

N

o:

Arg

um

enta

tio

n:

Is e

rosi

on a

n im

po

rtan

t is

sue

in Y

ogya

kar

ta-S

aden

g c

orr

ido

r?

Yes

:

N

o:

Arg

um

enta

tio

n:

AS

SE

SS

ING

CU

MU

LAT

IVE

E

NV

IRO

NM

EN

T

SE

NS

ITIV

ITY

AN

D C

UM

ULA

TIV

E I

MP

AC

T I

N S

TR

AT

EG

IC E

NV

IRO

NM

EN

TA

L A

SS

ES

SM

EN

T (

SE

A)

(C

AS

E S

TU

DY

: YO

GY

AK

AR

TA

-SA

DE

NG

CO

RR

IDO

R)

Are

thes

e ca

tego

ries

(kar

st, w

ater

cat

chm

ent

area

s an

d g

round

wat

er) in

clud

ed a

s th

e geo

logic

al c

rite

ria

to b

e co

nsi

der

ed in

Yo

gya

kar

ta-S

aden

g C

orr

idor?

Yes

:

N

o:

Arg

um

enta

tio

n:

a.

Kars

t

Whic

h c

ateg

ori

es o

f K

arst

are

ther

e in

Gunung K

idul ?

(G

ive

x to

sel

ect

your

answ

er)

a. C

lass

1/

Kel

as 1

: C

onse

rvat

ion a

rea

b. C

lass

II

/ C

lass

II:

Co

mb

inat

ion o

f co

nse

rvat

ion a

nd

cultiv

ated

are

a w

ith t

he

rest

rict

ed u

se

c. C

lass

III

/K

elas

III

: C

ultiv

ated

are

a

Arg

um

enta

tio

n :

Do

es the

kar

st r

egio

n in

the

stud

y ar

ea a

t ri

sk f

rom

dev

elo

pm

ents

?

Yes

:

N

o:

Arg

um

enta

tio

n:

What

act

ivitie

s p

ote

ntial

ly g

ives

ris

e to

ris

ks?

Arg

um

enta

tio

n:

Are

ther

e an

y p

revio

us

stud

ies

regar

din

g the

del

inea

tio

n o

f K

arst

zo

nes

?

Yes

:

N

o:

If t

he

answ

er is

yes

, ca

n I

use

as

the

del

inea

tio

n a

s se

nsi

tive

area

s o

f K

arst

?

What

typ

e o

f ac

tivitie

s is

allo

wed

in t

he

kar

st r

egio

n o

f G

unungkid

ul?

Arg

um

enta

tio

n:

Are

min

ing a

ctiv

itie

s in

the

Kar

st G

unungkid

ul af

fect

ing t

he

pre

serv

atio

n o

f K

arst

?

Yes

:

N

o:

Arg

um

enta

tio

n:

Are

agri

cultura

l a

ctiv

itie

s in

the

Kar

st G

unungkid

ul af

fect

ing t

he

pre

serv

atio

n o

f K

arst

?

Yes

:

N

o:

Arg

um

enta

tio

n:

AS

SE

SS

ING

CU

MU

LAT

IVE

E

NV

IRO

NM

EN

T

SE

NS

ITIV

ITY

AN

D C

UM

ULA

TIV

E I

MP

AC

T I

N S

TR

AT

EG

IC E

NV

IRO

NM

EN

TA

L A

SS

ES

SM

EN

T (

SE

A)

(C

AS

E S

TU

DY

: Y

OG

YA

KA

RT

A-S

AD

EN

G

CO

RR

IDO

R)

73

Ho

w w

ould

yo

u g

ive

sco

re f

or

land

use

cla

ssif

icat

ion o

n s

ensi

tive

area

in K

arst

Gunungkid

ul?

Giv

e th

e ra

nge

of

sco

re a

nd

giv

e th

e ar

gum

ents

! S

co

re (

ex

pert

ju

dg

em

en

t)

Cla

ss S

en

siti

ve

1

no

n

2

low

3

med

ium

4

hig

h

K

ars

t d

eli

neati

on

S

co

re

Arg

um

en

tati

on

Kar

st w

ith

min

ing a

ctiv

itie

s

Kar

st w

ith

res

iden

tial

an

d c

om

mer

cial

ac

tivit

ies

Kar

st w

ith

agri

cult

ure

ac

tivit

ies

Kar

st c

on

serv

atio

n a

rea

(ch

arac

teri

stic

o

f n

atu

re r

eser

ve)

No

n K

arst

are

a

Oth

er l

and

use

s…

b.

Wate

r re

ch

arg

e a

rea

Is t

her

e an

y m

ap d

elin

eatio

n o

f w

ater

rec

har

ge

area

in D

IY p

rovin

ce?

Whic

h d

istr

icts

in t

his

co

rrid

or

hav

e d

om

inan

t fu

nct

ion o

f w

ater

rec

har

ge

area

?

What

are

the

ind

icat

or

and

cri

teri

a b

een u

sed

to

del

inea

te w

ater

rec

har

ge

area

in Y

ogya

kar

ta?

c. G

rou

nd

wate

r

Can

the

gro

und

wat

er b

asin

be

an ind

icat

or

to d

eter

min

e gro

und

wat

er p

rote

ctio

n a

rea?

Yes

:

N

o:

Arg

um

enta

tio

n:

Bet

wee

n g

round

wat

er b

asin

at Y

ogya

kar

ta-S

lem

an a

nd

Wo

no

sari

, w

hic

h a

rea

is m

ore

pro

tect

ed?

Arg

um

enta

tio

n:

AS

SE

SS

ING

CU

MU

LAT

IVE

E

NV

IRO

NM

EN

T

SE

NS

ITIV

ITY

AN

D C

UM

ULA

TIV

E I

MP

AC

T I

N S

TR

AT

EG

IC E

NV

IRO

NM

EN

TA

L A

SS

ES

SM

EN

T (

SE

A)

(C

AS

E S

TU

DY

: YO

GY

AK

AR

TA

-SA

DE

NG

CO

RR

IDO

R)

Do

yo

u a

gre

e w

ith t

hes

e fo

llow

ing g

roup

s /

cat

ego

ries

of

ind

icat

or

and

cri

teri

a b

ello

w to

def

ine

the

sensi

tive

area

of

geo

logy

and

so

il in

Yo

gya

kar

ta-S

aden

g?

Giv

e yo

ur

argum

ent an

d s

ign *

to

mar

k y

our

answ

er!

E

nvi

ron

men

tal

reso

urc

es

Ind

icato

rs

Cri

teri

a S

en

siti

vity

Ag

ree

Dis

ag

ree

Arg

um

en

tati

on

Kar

st

Cri

teri

a K

arst

:

- K

arst

wit

h m

inin

g a

ctiv

itie

s

- K

arst

co

nse

rvat

ion

are

a

(ch

arac

teri

stic

o

f n

atu

re

rese

rve)

- K

arst

wit

h r

esid

enti

al a

ctiv

itie

s

- K

arst

wit

h a

gri

cult

ure

ac

tivit

ies

- R

ecre

atio

n

- N

on

Kar

st a

rea

Are

a w

ith

th

e co

nse

rvat

ion

o

f kar

st a

nd

min

ing a

ctiv

ites

se

nsi

tivit

y is

con

sid

ered

of

the

geo

logic

al p

rote

cted

are

a.

Wat

er r

ech

arge

area

s

Lev

el o

f in

filt

rati

on

-Rap

id >

0.4

0

-Mo

der

atel

y ra

pid

(0.2

0-0

.45)

-Mo

der

ate

(0.1

0-0

.20)

- M

od

erat

ely

slo

w (

0.0

4-0

.10)

- Slo

w <

0.0

4

Are

a w

ith

th

e ra

pid

in

filt

rati

on

is

con

sid

ered

se

nsi

tive

as

the

area

w

ith

flo

od

po

ten

tial

an

d a

ble

to

ab

sorb

rai

n w

ater

in

ord

er t

o in

crea

se

the

gro

un

d w

ater

res

erves

Gro

un

dw

ater

pro

tect

ed ar

eas

- G

rou

nd

wat

er b

asin

(co

nfi

ned

aqu

ifer

)

- G

rou

nd

wat

er e

xtra

ctio

n

(pu

mp

age)

(Pre

sid

enti

al d

ecre

e N

o. 43/

1999)

Hig

h p

ote

nti

al o

f co

nfi

ned

aqu

ifer

an

d o

ver

pu

mp

age

are

con

sid

ered

sen

siti

ve

to

lan

d s

ub

sid

ence

So

il er

osi

on

So

il ty

pes

an

d lev

els

of

ero

sivit

y

Th

e h

igh

est

sco

re o

f so

il ty

pe

is c

on

sid

ered

mo

re s

ensi

tive

to e

rosi

on

th

an

the

low

est

sco

re o

f so

il ty

pe

Are

th

ose

in

dic

ato

rs s

up

po

rted

wit

h t

he

avai

lab

ility

of

dat

a?

Are

ther

e an

y geo

logy

and

so

il in

dic

ato

r in

Yo

gya

kar

ta-S

aden

g c

orr

ido

r to

be

consi

der

ed?

Yes

:

N

o:

If it

yes,

what

kin

d o

f th

e in

dic

ato

r an

d the

criter

ia t

o d

efin

e th

e se

nsi

tivity?

A

re t

he

ind

icat

ors

sup

po

rted

by

the

avai

lab

ility

of

dat

a?

AS

SE

SS

ING

CU

MU

LAT

IVE

E

NV

IRO

NM

EN

T

SE

NS

ITIV

ITY

AN

D C

UM

ULA

TIV

E I

MP

AC

T I

N S

TR

AT

EG

IC E

NV

IRO

NM

EN

TA

L A

SS

ES

SM

EN

T (

SE

A)

(C

AS

E S

TU

DY

: Y

OG

YA

KA

RT

A-S

AD

EN

G

CO

RR

IDO

R)

75

Gu

idin

g s

tru

ctu

re o

f th

e i

nte

rvie

ws

wit

h f

ore

stry

secto

r (b

iod

ivers

ity e

xp

ert

)

Bio

div

ers

ity

Do

es b

iod

iver

sity

bec

om

e an

imp

ort

ant is

sue

in t

he

Yo

gya

kar

ta-S

aden

gco

rrid

or?

Yes

: N

o:

Arg

um

enta

tio

n:

Is t

he

stat

us

of

bio

div

ersi

ty in

the

stud

y ar

ea c

ateg

ori

zed

as

thre

aten

ed?

Yes

: N

o:

Arg

um

enta

tio

n:

Is t

her

e an

y p

revio

us

stud

y re

gar

din

g d

elin

eatio

n o

f b

iod

iver

sity

dis

trib

utio

n in Y

ogya

kar

ta?

If t

he

answ

er is

no

, co

ntinue

to the

nex

t se

ctio

ns.

Is e

xis

tence

of

fore

st a

det

erm

inin

g f

acto

r fo

r b

iod

iver

sity

that

nee

ds

to b

e p

rote

cted

?

Arg

um

enta

tio

n:

Acc

ord

ing to

the

cate

go

ries

of

fore

st typ

es (

e.g. co

nse

rvat

ion,

pro

tect

ed, e

xp

erim

enta

l, p

rod

uct

ion f

ore

st)

do

they

hav

e d

iffe

rent fu

nct

ions

in t

erm

s o

f b

iod

iver

sity

pro

tect

ion?

Yes

: N

o:

Arg

um

enta

tio

n:

In a

dd

itio

n t

o the

fore

st a

rea,

do

es p

rote

cted

kar

st a

reas

als

o h

ave

a ro

le in t

he

pro

tect

ion o

f b

iod

iver

sity

?

Yes

: N

o:

Arg

um

enta

tio

n:

What

are

the

typ

es o

f b

iod

iver

sity

in Y

ogya

kar

ta-S

aden

g c

orr

ido

r th

at n

eed

to

pro

tect

?

Are

thes

e p

rote

cted

are

as h

ave

imp

ort

ant

role

to

the

sensi

tivity

of

flo

ra?

And

whic

h o

ne

has

a m

ore

imp

ort

ant th

e p

rote

ctio

n o

f fl

ora

fro

m the

extinct

ion

Giv

e sc

ore

of

low

- h

igh s

ensi

tive

and

giv

e th

e ar

gum

ents

!

AS

SE

SS

ING

CU

MU

LAT

IVE

E

NV

IRO

NM

EN

T

SE

NS

ITIV

ITY

AN

D C

UM

ULA

TIV

E I

MP

AC

T I

N S

TR

AT

EG

IC E

NV

IRO

NM

EN

TA

L A

SS

ES

SM

EN

T (

SE

A)

(C

AS

E S

TU

DY

: YO

GY

AK

AR

TA

-SA

DE

NG

CO

RR

IDO

R)

Sco

re (

ex

pert

ju

dg

em

en

t)

Cla

ss S

en

siti

ve

1

no

n

2

low

3

med

ium

4

hig

h

Bio

div

ers

ity p

rote

cti

on

Y

es

No

S

co

re

Arg

um

en

tati

on

Pro

tect

ed fo

rest

Co

nse

rvat

ion

fo

rest

Exp

erim

enta

l fo

rest

Pro

du

ctio

n f

ore

st

Kar

st p

rote

cted

are

a

Oth

er l

and

use

s

Is t

he

dis

tance

fac

tor

fro

m the

nat

ura

l co

nse

rvat

ion a

rea

sensi

tive

to t

he

infl

uen

ce o

f b

iod

iver

sity

exis

tence

?

Yes

:

No

:

If t

he

answ

er is

yes

, w

hat

are

the

dis

tance

sho

uld

be

fro

m the

nat

ura

l co

nse

rvat

ion a

rea

to the

build

up

are

a in

ter

ms

of

bio

div

ersi

ty p

rote

ctio

n?

Are

the

buff

er z

ones

alr

ead

y in

clud

e in

fo

rest

del

inea

tio

n?

Giv

e ar

gum

ents

:

Do

yo

u a

gre

e w

ith t

hes

e fo

llow

ing g

roup

s /

cat

ego

ries

of

ind

icat

or

and

cri

teri

a b

ello

w t

o d

efin

e th

e se

nsi

tive

area

of

bio

div

ersi

tyin

Yo

gya

kar

ta-S

aden

g?

Giv

e yo

ur

argum

ent an

d s

ign *

to

mar

k y

our

answ

er!

En

viro

nm

en

tal

reso

urc

es

Ind

icato

r S

en

siti

vity

Cri

teri

a

Ag

ree

Dis

ag

ree

Arg

um

en

tati

on

Bio

div

ersi

ty

- C

on

serv

atio

nfo

rest

- P

rote

cted

fo

rest

- E

xp

erim

enta

l fo

rest

Pro

du

ctio

n f

ore

st

- K

arst

co

nse

rvat

ion

- O

ther

lan

d u

ses.

.

Th

e ty

pe

of

fore

st a

nd

oth

er l

and

use

s th

at a

re c

on

sid

ered

sen

siti

ve

to b

iod

iver

sity

pro

tect

ion

are

as

Infl

uen

ce o

f co

nse

rvat

ion

fo

rest

by

the

dis

tan

ce

fro

m a

nat

ura

l co

nse

rvat

ion

fo

rest

(b

uff

er z

on

es)

Th

e ar

eas

clo

ser

to t

he

nat

ure

are

a is

co

nsi

der

ed m

ore

sen

siti

ve

to t

he

infl

uen

ces

of

bio

div

ersi

ty e

xist

ence

th

an

area

fu

rth

er a

way

.

Are

th

ose

in

dic

ato

rs s

up

po

rted

wit

h t

he

avai

lab

ility

of

dat

a?

AS

SE

SS

ING

CU

MU

LAT

IVE

E

NV

IRO

NM

EN

T

SE

NS

ITIV

ITY

AN

D C

UM

ULA

TIV

E I

MP

AC

T I

N S

TR

AT

EG

IC E

NV

IRO

NM

EN

TA

L A

SS

ES

SM

EN

T (

SE

A)

(C

AS

E S

TU

DY

: Y

OG

YA

KA

RT

A-S

AD

EN

G

CO

RR

IDO

R)

77

Are

ther

e an

y in

dic

ato

r o

f b

iod

iver

sity

sen

sitivity

in Y

ogya

kar

ta-S

aden

g c

orr

ido

r to

be

consi

der

ed?

Yes

: N

o:

Exp

lain

and

giv

e ar

gum

ent:

Are

the

ind

icat

ors

sup

po

rted

by

the

avai

lab

ility

of

dat

a?

Gu

idin

g s

tru

ctu

re o

f th

e in

terv

iew

s w

ith

ag

ricu

ltu

re e

xp

ert

Ag

ricu

ltu

re s

en

siti

vit

y b

y l

an

d t

ak

e

Is t

he

dec

reas

ing o

f ag

ricu

lture

are

as b

eco

mes

an im

po

rtan

t is

sue

in Y

ogya

kar

ta-S

aden

g c

orr

ido

r?

Acc

ord

ing to

the

typ

e o

f ag

ricu

lture

, w

hic

h o

ne

is m

ore

sen

sitive

to la

nd

tak

e?

Giv

e sc

ore

of

no

n s

ensi

tive

to h

igh s

ensi

tive

and

giv

e th

e ar

gum

ents

!

Sco

re (e

xper

t ju

dgem

ent)

C

lass

Sen

siti

ve

1 n

on

2

low

3

med

ium

4

hig

h

Ag

ricu

ltu

re p

rote

cti

on

Y

es

No

S

co

re

Arg

um

en

tati

on

Agri

cult

ure

wet

lan

d (

irri

gat

ion

)

Agri

cult

ure

dry

lan

d (

rain

fed

)

Oth

er:

Are

th

ose

in

dic

ato

rs s

up

po

rted

wit

h t

he

avai

lab

ility

of

dat

a?

Are

ther

e an

y in

dic

ato

r o

f ag

ricu

lture

sen

sitivity

in Y

ogya

kar

ta-S

aden

g c

orr

ido

r to

be

consi

der

ed?

Yes

: N

o:

Exp

lain

and

giv

e ar

gum

ent:

Are

the

ind

icat

ors

sup

po

rted

by

the

avai

lab

ility

of

dat

a?

AS

SE

SS

ING

CU

MU

LAT

IVE

E

NV

IRO

NM

EN

T

SE

NS

ITIV

ITY

AN

D C

UM

ULA

TIV

E I

MP

AC

T I

N S

TR

AT

EG

IC E

NV

IRO

NM

EN

TA

L A

SS

ES

SM

EN

T (

SE

A)

(C

AS

E S

TU

DY

: YO

GY

AK

AR

TA

-SA

DE

NG

CO

RR

IDO

R)

Gu

idin

g s

tru

ctu

re o

f th

e in

terv

iew

s w

ith

so

cia

l ex

pert

s.

What

are

the

soci

al iss

ues

in t

he

stud

y ar

ea?

What

are

the

ind

icat

or

to m

easu

re t

he

dis

rup

tio

n o

f so

cial

lif

e?

Are

ther

e an

y re

latio

nsh

ip b

etw

een e

nvir

onm

enta

l d

egra

dat

ion b

etw

een the

incr

easi

ng o

f p

op

ula

tio

n in

the

stud

y ar

ea?

Are

ther

e an

y in

dic

ato

r o

f so

cio

or

eco

no

mic

asp

ect

in Y

ogya

kar

ta-S

aden

g c

orr

ido

r to

be

consi

der

ed?

Yes

:

N

o:

Exp

lain

and

giv

e ar

gum

ent:

Are

the

ind

icat

ors

sup

po

rted

by

the

avai

lab

ility

of

dat

a?

AS

SE

SS

ING

CU

MU

LAT

IVE

E

NV

IRO

NM

EN

T

SE

NS

ITIV

ITY

AN

D C

UM

ULA

TIV

E I

MP

AC

T I

N S

TR

AT

EG

IC E

NV

IRO

NM

EN

TA

L A

SS

ES

SM

EN

T (

SE

A)

(C

AS

E S

TU

DY

: Y

OG

YA

KA

RT

A-S

AD

EN

G

CO

RR

IDO

R)

79

Ap

end

ix B

: A

ir P

olluti

on

In

dex

in

th

e M

ain

Ro

ad Y

ogy

akar

ta-S

aden

g C

orr

ido

r

nu

mber

Road

Nam

e

Len

gth

(km

)

Ave

rag

e

Dail

y

Traff

ic

(AD

T)

Veh

icle

Kil

om

ete

r

Trave

lerd

(VK

T)

PM

Road

Tyre &

Brak

e

Wear

CO

tot

(ton

/tah

un

)

CO

2 t

ot

(ton

/tah

un

)

HC

tot

(ton

/tah

un

)

PM

tot

(ton

/tah

un

)

Tota

l

Poll

uta

nt

Index

(Pij

)

1

Ban

gu

nta

pan

8,1

9

10876,5

5

32517464

0,3

74054

181,0

179

2596,0

68

93,3

7998

0,8

35672

2871,3

01

2

Gad

ing

5,1

4

4068,8

5

7627967

0,1

00295

38,7

8978

711,2

65

19,1

3172

0,2

09641

769,3

962

3

Alu

n-a

lun

wo

no

sari

4,5

1

5748,4

5

9461727

0,1

03409

52,2

6484

705,5

263

28,3

2164

0,1

99669

786,3

125

4

Ro

ng

ko

p

8,5

8

1148,5

5

3598466

0,0

40793

20,3

8661

276,4

586

10,6

9549

0,0

73318

307,6

14

5

Piy

un

gan

6,5

0

4613,2

10942098

0,1

51721

56,0

2093

1154,5

79

27,4

5591

0,3

22451

1238,3

78

6

Sam

bip

itu

4,8

4

4731,9

5

8363942

0,1

1166

43,5

2291

854,9

71

22,4

6937

0,2

13827

921,1

771

7

Bele

harj

o

5,2

7

2982,0

5

5733027

0,0

74524

30,4

7819

558,5

195

15,6

2368

0,1

44616

604,7

66

8

Sem

an

u

12,0

6

1802,1

5

7932937

0,0

94194

43,8

3009

672,3

552

23,2

1358

0,1

64642

739,5

635

Sou

rce:

Pu

stra

l Yo

gyak

arta