east asia JourJourJour JourJour Labour and ... · YTKI Yayasan Tenaga Kerja Indonesia ... Botabek (Bogor, Tangerang, and Bekasi) (Media Indonesia, 25 June 1998), but their operations

ESocioeconomic changes amongbeca drivers in Jakarta,1988–98

Yosh Azuma99-2

Asia Pacific Press at theAUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY

http://ncdsnet.anu.edu.au

east asia

LaLaLaLaLabour and Manabour and Manabour and Manabour and Manabour and Managggggement in Deement in Deement in Deement in Deement in DevvvvvelopmentelopmentelopmentelopmentelopmentJourJourJourJourJournalnalnalnalnal

mdLVolume 1, Number 6

Labour and Management in Development Journal, Volume 1, Number 6 2© Asia Pacific Press 2000

Socioeconomic changes among beca drivers in Jakarta, 1988–98 Yosh Azuma

Abbreviations

BPS Biro Pusat Statistik

DBB Daerah Bebas Beca (Beca Free Zone)

DKI Daerah Khusus Ibukota (Special region of the capital)

JPS Jaring Pengaman Sosial (social security net funds)

KB Keluarga Berencana (family planning program)

KTP Kartu Tanda Penduduk (identification cards)

KUD Korperasi Unit Desa (village cooperative unit)

NGO non governmental organisation

YTKI Yayasan Tenaga Kerja Indonesia

© Asia Pacific Press 2000

This work is copyright. Apart from those uses which may be permitted under the CopyrightAct 1968 as amended, no part may be reproduced by any process without written permissionfrom the publisher.

ISSN 1443–6698

ISBN 0 7315 3644 4

Yosh Azuma is currently Senior Researcher in the United Nations TransitionalAdministration in East Timor (UNTAET).



The sudden economic crisis which began inThailand in July 1997 has brought aboutfundamental change throughout SoutheastAsia. In Indonesia, monetary crisis (KrisisMoniter or Krismon in Indonesia) and overalleconomic stagnation contributed to theousting of long-serving President Soeharto.In Jakarta, the number of unemployed hassoared, and the shortage of basiccommodities caused by the collapse of thedistribution system is bringing about a rapidincrease in urban informal sector jobs(Kompas, 29 January 1999). At the same time,beca, a human powered transport systemwhich was banned from Jakarta in 1990,have reappeared. This paper shows howKrismon and related external influencesdetermine socio-economic aspects of thelives of beca drivers in Jakarta, some of themost vulnerable people in Indonesia. Thispaper analyses the cause and consequencesof changes in socio-economic aspects of thelives of beca drivers in Jakarta between 1988and 1998.

Context

The social phenomenon of circularmigration between rural areas and urbancentres in Java has been widelyacknowledged (see Hetler 1986; Hugo 1981a;Saefullah 1994 for work on rural Java; andCastles 1967; Critchfield 1970a; 1970b;Jellinek 1977, 1978, 1991; Kartini-Sjahrir 1990;Koentjaraningrat 1974; Leuwol 1988;Papanek 1975; and Temple 1974 forJakarta-centred research). People are pulledby the ‘bright lights’ of the capital city andthe attraction of a cash income. In particular,under the New Order regime, which

encouraged industrialisation by Westerndevelopment strategies, a large number ofsmall landholders and landless peasants inrural Java were attracted to Jakarta.Capitalist development, due mainly toforeign investment, official developmentassistance, and oil revenue, has providedroads and various forms of transport(Hardjono and Hill 1989:257; Hugo1981b:357; Jones 1985:157). However, theshortage of formal sector jobs in the city hasled to the majority of migrants becominginvolved in the urban informal sector. Inaddition, as Fuke (1986), Hetler (1986), Hugo(1981a) and Kartini-Sjahrir (1990) found, thetype of informal sector occupationundertaken depends in part on the homevillages. Beca riders tend to come fromcertain villages.

The beca has not only been a feature ofJakarta’s tourist fabric but also a popularform of public transport for the lower andlower-middle class population of Jakarta.Tour guide books on Indonesia tend tocontain illustrations of beca and directionson how to use them. Yet operating a trishawhas come to be regarded as a dead-endoccupation for males, in the same way asprostitution is viewed for females inIndonesia (Jellinek 1987:184; Murai 1982:139;Tempo, 3 January 1990).2 For example, formerPresident Sukarno once commented ‘[d]onot be a beca driver (tukang beca); if anything,be a coolie, because beca driving ishumiliating work’. Over the last twodecades, during the New Order, the imageof the tukang beca has not changed. Ifanything the government has projectedtukang beca as a symbol of Indonesian



backwardness. Since 1970, policy withregard to beca operation has been under thecontrol of the Governor (Dick 1981; Forbes1990:117; Kompas, 25 June 1998). The destinyof beca drivers has been largely determinedby the city authorities whose aim has beento eliminate them. The adoption of such apolicy in DKI (Daerah Khusus Ibukota (Specialregion of the capital)) has greatly influencedthe job opportunities of rural–urbanmigrants.

Ali Sadikin, the Governor of DKI from1966 to 1977, pursued a severe campaignagainst the beca drivers (DBB (Daerah BebasBeca or Beca Free Zone), seeking to pushthem out of Jakarta (Abeyasekere 1987:242).Wiyogo Atmodarminto, the Governor from1988 to 1992, considered the tukang becapopulation the useless people of Jakarta(DKI 1988). Since January 1990, GovernorWiyogo has accelerated the eliminationoperation (garokan).3 Special eliminationteams were organised to confiscate beca andthen dump them into Jakarta Bay to makeartificial reefs. By 1991, beca had virtuallydisappeared from the streets of Jakarta(Kompas, 17 March 1990; Tempo, 26 May1990). Estimated at about 300,000 before1990, the number of beca only amounted toabout 5,000 in 1998 (Kompas, 25 June 1998).An important effect of garokan is that thenumber of beca has been controlled by thegovernment authorities regardless of the factthat the original aim was elimination. Thismeans that the number of beca driving jobshas effectively been under governmentcontrol. Owing to structural factors, therelatively high ratio of people to beca wassustained, resulting in higher fees and arelatively secure livelihood for theremaining beca drivers.

Since the almost complete disappearanceof beca in the early 1990s, Jakarta haschanged substantially. The population hasgrown from 8,227,000 in 1990 to 9,704,000 in1998 (Kantor Statistik DKI 1997:52–53). In thesame period, Indonesia enjoyed remarkableeconomic growth; an average of 7.7 per centfor the years 1991–94, reaching 8 per cent in1996 (Lindblad 1997:14). In Jakarta economicgrowth was reflected in the building of alarge number of multi-storey buildings asshopping centres, luxury apartments andhotels. Most people were optimistic aboutthe future of the Indonesian economy (Hill1998:93). There was little criticism of Suhartoand his family regarding the expansion ofcorruption.

The riot in Jakarta in May 1998 signifiedsubstantial diminishing of governmentauthority. A small number of beca driversdared to move across the border intoBotabek (Bogor, Tangerang, and Bekasi)(Media Indonesia, 25 June 1998), but theiroperations were limited to the peripheralareas. On 24 June, Governor Sutiyoso4 gavepermission for beca to operate for the timebeing in the back-alleys of Jakarta.

The reappearance of beca driversprompted fervent criticism of Sutiyoso’sdecision from local administrations. On 26June, several mayors (walikota) expressedconcern that the cost of banning beca fromJakarta after the economic crisis would beenormous and that security problems wouldincrease in the meantime. Sutiyosocapitulated to the pressure of the citycouncillors and revoked his decision on 30June—only six days after his initialannouncement. Beca operation was bannedonce again in accordance with the Perda



(Peraturan Daerah (Local by-laws)) areflection of concerns over the heavyfinancial burden of re-eliminating beca in thefuture (Jakarta Post; Kompas, 1 July 1998).

Operation system of beca

There are similarities in the operation oftrishaws (beca) across the cities of SoutheastAsia. The trishaw provides door-to-doorservices for middle and lower-class people,effectively extending the formal publictransportation system. Therefore, becaoperate primarily in the side streets.

However, beca operation in Jakartadiffers from other Southeast Asian cities.After the establishment of the DBB in 1971,authorities forced beca out of the city centre.Growth of the middle-class, partly resultingfrom increased oil revenue in the mid 1970s,precipitated rapid motorisation and growthin the number of private cars. Consequently,beca were no longer needed in many middleclass suburbs.

Beca drivers tend to congregate at certain‘strategic’ locations where the chances ofpicking up a passenger are known to begood. These locations include bus stops,intersections, in front of markets, and schooland housing complexes (Kitajima 1990:132–33). The anthropological study of becadrivers in Yogyakarta by Shri Ahimusa(1988:133) shows a similar style of operation.However, the DBB policy, together with thedisorganised public transport system inJakarta, has contributed to increasingdemands for the service beca provide.

Previously, beca provided indispensabledoor-to-door services for lower-middle andlower class urban dwellers, especially inkampung areas. Relatively wealthy urban

dwellers, moreover, used beca drivers tochaperone their children to and from school.Traders used beca to transport their rawingredients to and from the market.Housewives used beca to ferry them to andfrom the market each day. Office workersused beca to take them to work (Jellinek1991:60; see also Forbes 1979:165).

Beca drivers tend to cultivate regularcustomers (langganan), who would be servedby a friend should the normal beca driverbe unavailable (if they were to visit theirhome village briefly, for example).

During the eight year absence of becafrom the streets of Jakarta, the public sectorgradually met the demand for low-costtransport in the back alleys. Evidence showsthat the number of Mikrolet increased from8,751 in 1990 to 10,498 in 1996 (KantorStatistik DKI 1997:282). Although thestatistics do not present the exact figure, thenumber of bicycle taxis (ojek sepeda) and ojekmotor in Jakarta back alleys soared (BisnisIndonesia, 4 March 1998; Suara Karya, 18February 1998). The development of low-cost urban transport further marginalisedbeca.5

Lower-middle class suburbs have clearlybecome the operation areas of beca. JakartaPost (25 June 1998) and Suara Pembaruan (1July 1998) report that several regions, suchas Jembatan Lima (West Jakarta), KaliMalang (East Jakarta), Gadja Mada (CentralJakarta), Tanjung Priok (North Jakarta) andBintaro (South Jakarta) have a high densityof beca vehicles. My field work from Octoberto December 1998 suggests that TanjungPriok, Pademangan, Muarabaru, andKalibaru (North Jakarta), Telukgong,Jelambar, Grogol Jembatan Lima (West



Jakarta), Rawamangun (East Jakarta), andthe Bendunganhilir–Pasar Tanahabangcorridor (Central Jakarta) were majoroperation sites for beca (Kompas, 11 March1999; Sinar Harapan, 10 March 1999).

Beca transport has grown in these areasbecause of the lack of crackdowns resultingfrom funding shortfalls for garokan and thecomplete absence of a clear policy towardsbeca. In December 1998, most surveyrespondents were not scared of Tramtib. Fearof military personnel in Indonesiasignificantly declined after the May 1998riots. Garokan became harder to undertake,moreover, because of increasing concern forhuman rights and improved press freedom(Kompas, 26 January 1999). The number ofbeca is steady or slightly increasing.Although no conclusive or comprehensivestatistics are available, it is estimated thatthere were about 5,000 vehicles at the endof 1998. Everybody is waiting until a clearpolicy emerges.6

Forbes (1978:222) found that in UjungPandang there were four ways of acquiringa beca; (1) some beca drivers own their ownbeca—owner-riders; (2) some drivers hirevehicles from beca owners—characterised asrented beca drivers; (3) some drivers buybeca vehicles paying by instalment; (4) some

drivers borrow a beca vehicle from someonewithout charge. Similar categories areapparent in Jakarta.

Table 1 shows the breakdown of becaownership. In a 1978 study by DKI (1978:29),only 2.7 per cent of beca drivers wereclassified as owner-operators. By contrast,of the respondents in my 1988–89 study, 89.4per cent used beca batangan (beca renters),whereas 10.6 per cent had their own beca(owner-operators). This had grown toalmost 15 per cent in 1998. This is asignificant change in the levels of becaownership, which is directly related toIndonesia’s remarkable economic growth.7

The possibility of harsh treatment afterthe June 1999 election, however, has mademost beca drivers hesitant to buy their ownvehicles, many have preferred to rent. Theincreased fare for a trip compared to tenyears ago makes it relatively easy for becadrivers to pay the rental charge.8 Empiricaldata support this view. In the 1988–89survey, rent varied from Rp 500 to 2,500. Thegroup which was charged between Rp 500and Rp 999 operated for a half-day shift only.Therefore, the fee was about half a day’srental costs. In 1998, the rental fee variedfrom Rp 2,000 to 5,000 depending on theoperation areas and the condition of the

Table 1 The breakdown of beca ownership (per cent)

Researcher DKI Azuma AzumaYear 1978 1988–89 1998

Owner-rider 2.7 10.6 14.9Rented from tauke or others 97.3 89.4 85.1Total (n=) 100 (300) 100 (312) 100 (275)

Sources: DKI (1978) and field studies in 1988–89, and 1998



vehicle, with the majority of drivers payingbetween Rp 3,000 and 3,999. Given that theestimated minimum passenger charge forbeca was approximately Rp 1,000 per trip in1998, the rental charge was quite affordablefor the drivers. In 1998, half-day shifts hadalmost entirely disappeared. Beca driversstruggled to maintain their margins,however, in the face of hyperinflationresulting from the economic crisis. Forexample, a respondent claimed that a tyretube had cost only Rp3,500 previously, butcost Rp10,500 in 1998.

There are a number of merits to rentingrather than owning beca. First, the livingcosts of the renter are reduced, because theycan find accommodation in the pondok (freelodging) of a tauke’s house which has basicfacilities, such as a toilet and bathroom.9

Tempo (13 January 1990) observed thatdrivers found renting a beca more profitablethan owning, because the daily rental feegave beca drivers an incentive to go out andseek business. It was perceived that driverswho owned their own beca had lessmotivation to make money (kurang semagat)and had a tendency to be lazy (malas–malasan), because they did not have to pay adaily rental fee. Renting was also a logicalchoice when the risk of beca beingconfiscated by city authorities was sosignificant.

The option of renting was furtherencouraged by the flexibility of the rentalsystem (Jellinek 1991:59). For example, becaowners readily gave drivers permission tosettle accounts within several days or indaily instalments, depending on how busythey were. Because of the higher incomes in

Jakarta associated with DBB policy, therental obligations were normally met intime. Beca drivers who rented were able tovisit their villages without worrying thattheir beca might be stolen. They could easilychange their place of employment within thesame region through village contacts whooperated beca (cari batangan). ‘Alternatively,when a regular driver returned to his villagehe allowed a friend to drive his vehicle untilhe returned’ (Jellinek 1991:59). Thus, anotherreason for the popularity of renting was thatit facilitated circular movement betweenJakarta and the beca drivers’ home villages.

Pondok system and the relationshipwith tauke

The pondok system is an importantmechanism which enhances circularmigration. It encourages migration to Jakartadespite the absence of secure and freeaccomodation. Pondok also provides a usefulinsurance system for the tauke to ensurepayment of the daily rental fee and reducethe theft of beca vehicles by renters (Jellinek1991:61,63).

In the early 1970s, prior to thedevelopment of the pondok system, becadrivers rented their own accomodation(Critchfield 1970a:19,124; 1970b:8). A studyconducted by Kuntjoro-Jakti (1976:93-94)found that 60.4 per cent of beca drivers livedin their own houses. Temple (1974:Table5-43) found that, in 1973, 40.8 per cent of thebeca drivers in his sample resided in theirown houses and 34 per cent of them lived inrented accommodation.10 The remarkableeconomic growth of Jakarta since the late1970s has encouraged an increase in the



number of indigenous beca owners whoprovided free accommodation for becadrivers (Jellinek 1991:63).

However, this pattern of accommodationchanged between the late 1970s and late1980s. Table 2 compares accommodationtypes in a study by Pabel (1978:30–31) in 1978and those of the author in 1988–89 and 1998.The most significant change lay in theproportion of those renting a house or room(rumah kontrak), which grew from 8 per centin 1978 to 18.3 per cent in 1988–89 and 35.6per cent in 1998.

Renting a room or house (kontrak)generally operates like a pondok. Those whocome from the same region or village oftenrent a small house or a room in a shanty-town. While there were many problemsassociated with this form of accomodation,such renters emphasised the enhancedpersonal freedom they enjoyed. This was incontrast to the expectations that had to bemet when living in a tauke’s house.

The economic growth since the NewOrder commenced is strongly relevant to thechanging characteristics of tauke. During the1950s and 1960s, most tauke were Chineseand ran medium or large-scale operations

(Lubis 1983:160). This is an important pointbecause, according to a former Chinesetauke,11 the pondok system was notestablished at that time. Chinese, largelyinfluenced by ethnic prejudices, were rarelyallowed to share a house with theirsubordinate beca drivers. In order to preventthe theft of beca vehicles, the drivers had tohand over their identification cards (KTP)and show the tauke their drivers’ licences(SIM Beca) (Pabel 1978:38–39).

In the early 1970s the majority of taukewere still Chinese who owned more than 100beca. In 1974, anti-Chinese demonstratorsprotested that ‘even though indigenousIndonesians earn money by beca driving,only Chinese beca owners can make it rich’12

(Matsumura 1986:175). Heavy registrationtaxes and harassment by DKI officials in themid 1970s forced almost all Chinese becaowners into bajaj and taxis (Jellinek1991:59,61).

The nature of ownership has changeddramatically. In 1988–89, most tauke weresmall scale enterprises consisting of fewerthan 10 vehicles. The nature of therelationship between the beca drivers andthe tauke has also changed. In Ujung

Table 2 Status of present accommodation (per cent)

Researcher Pabel Azuma Azuma1978 1988–89 1998

Rumah tauke (Pondok system) 74 67.3 23.6Kontrakan (renting a room/house) 8 18.3 35.6Own house 14 5.8 5.8Friends’ house 3 1.9 8.7In the beca n.a. 4.8 26.2Others 1 1.9 n.a.Total 100 100 100(n=) (100) (312) (275)

Sources: Pabel (1978); field studies in 1988–89 and 1998



Pandang, beca drivers did not display anyparticular loyalty to the owners, in contrastwith other informal sector workers. Becadrivers changed their tauke frequently(Forbes 1978:68). Pabel’s empirical data(1978:38–39) indicate that in the same periodthe relationship between beca drivers andtauke in Jakarta was essentially paternalistic.Jellinek (1991:61) also describes the warmrelationship between tauke and renters, suchthat loans were provided when drivers wereill and ‘gifts of clothing and money [weregiven] at Lebaran’.

The situation began to changedramatically from the mid 1980s. In part thiswas because of the introduction of the‘rumpon’13 project by Governor Suprapto,which meant that beca owners could not buytheir beca vehicles back from KAMTIB afterconfiscation. There were more small scalebeca owners competing for drivers and thiscontributed to the destruction of the closepatron–client relationship that hadpreviously existed.14

In the 1998 survey, about half of therespondents shared the same provincialorigin with their tauke, and some 20 per centshared the same district. More than a quarterof the respondents came from differentprovinces. Three out of eight tauke rentedto drivers from the same district and othersrented to drivers from the same province.Thus, the village-based network of beca andtauke has continued to decline over the pastdecade. The apparently contradictory trendof decreasing thefts of beca vehicles may beexplained by the mutual trust arising out ofthe overall improvement in welfare.Compared with the 1980s, the behaviour ofrespondents in their relationships with taukewas much more disciplined.

Another change which took placebetween 1988–89 and 1998 was a substantialdecline in the number liting in rumah taukealongside a sharp increase in the proportionrenting a room or house (kontrakan). First,the uncertain prospects for beca operationhave made the tauke reluctant to allow becadrivers to reside in their houses. Second,village-based networks have continued todecline, such that less than 10 per cent ofthe respondents who are living in the tauke’shouse come from the same district. Third,the nominal income for tauke grew becauseof the limited number of beca vehicles.Fourth, beca drivers are becoming moreindividualistic than before. The proportionof those sleeping ‘in the beca’ rose from 4.8per cent in 1988–9 to 26.2 per cent in 1998;the invention of Autan15 (mosquito repellent)contributed to this change. Using this newanti-mosquito substance, beca drivers cansleep without interruption from the insects.Survey data show that almost all of therespondents sleeping in beca—who tendedto be poorer and older drivers—used thisrepellent.

In general, beca drivers come to thetauke’s house to pay rent every 2–7 days,depending on their relationship andsituation. If the drivers have gained thetauke’s trust, more relaxed paymentconditions (more than 10 days) are tolerated.Also, some tauke collect the fee from thedrivers’ operation site. In this manner,significant change has occurred over tenyears.

Similar change is evident in guaranteesfor renting a beca. In the past, in order toprevent theft, some tauke kept the drivers’KTP or a copy of it; some tauke still do this.However, since most tauke tend to rent to



acquaintances, they usually do not requireany guarantee (tanpa jaminan). Sometimes,beca vehicles are stolen and sold, but taukedo not take out insurance to prevent theft.The relatively low cost of vehicles andmanageable number of subordinates havecontributed to this practice.

Beca drivers in Jakarta

The previous sections described generalfeatures of beca operation in Jakarta. Thefocus of this section is on the specific surveyresponses. In general, beca in Jakarta—as inother Southeast Asian regions—are operatedby men of all age groups (Wheeler andI’Anson 1998). Table 3 compares thebreakdown of beca drivers’ age in 1988–89and 1998. The age group 25–39 accounts formore than half of the total number ofrespondents.16 Similarly, in 1998 the mostproductive and energetic age group (25–39)made up the largest proportion (close to two-thirds). The proportion of drivers over 50years old seems to be increasing, whereasthe proportion aged less than 24 years seemsto be falling. It seems that the age structurehas changed significantly in the course often years.

Table 4 shows that most respondentswere married. The studies by DKI (1978:10),Suparman (1984:Table 11) and YTKI(1987:Table 1) reported that a similarpercentage of their respondents weremarried. The married respondents tendedto have a relatively large number ofchildren.17 Table 4 indicates that in spite of afamily planning program initiated by thegovernment, about two-thirds of therespondents had more than three childrenin 1988–89. Consequently, drivers have toearn additional income to support theirchildren until they are old enough tocontribute to the household income. It is alsoa Javanese custom that a husband shouldprovide for his wife and family (Kodiran1983:334). Table 4 shows that mostrespondents were married in 1998, but asignificant difference from the earlier surveyis obvious in the number of children. In 1998,the proportion had dropped; with only abouthalf reporting more than three children. Therespondents seemed to be more aware of thepositive effects of family planning. It mightbe possible to interpret the declining numberof children as a result of continued forcefulfamily planning practices and growingawareness among beca drivers.

Table 3 Respondents, by age (per cent)

Age 1988–89 199815–24 21.9 15.025–29 19.2 17.230–34 22.1 19.435–39 11.5 17.240–44 9.6 12.845–49 8.7 4.850+ 7.9 13.6Total (n=) 100 (312) 100 (274)

Source: field studies in 1988–89 and 1998



Origin of beca drivers

Behavioural migration theory proposes thatpeople of the same ethnic or racial group tendto integrate into a particular occupation andeven live in the same area (Miles 1991). Table5 presents the origins of the beca drivers whoparticipated in the studies. The largestproportion of beca drivers were drawn fromIndramayu, Cirebon, Brebes and Tegal. Nostrong conclusions can be drawn from directcomparisons of the different studies, becausethey used different survey locations andmethodologies and were conducted indifferent years (DKI 1978:8; Pabel 1978:15–16; YTKI 1987:Table 1–3).

The northern coastal regions of West andCentral Java provided such a considerablenumber of beca drivers because of the easeof access to Jakarta. These regions areconnected to the capital by the Jalur Pantura(Northern coastal highway) and a railway,originally established under Dutch rule(Hugo 1985b:87). Temple (1974:Table 5–33)found that, in 1973, 52.8 per cent of becadrivers in Jakarta travelled by bus and 46.4per cent used the train. In the 1960s, beforethe highway was built, it took more than 12hours to travel by road between Jakarta andIndramayu. Today the bus service operating

along this highway is an extremely rapidand popular mode of transport (Manning1986:15).

The proportion of beca drivers fromCentral Java was lower than that from WestJava in the 1970s studies, but by the late1980s, as my survey data revealed, morethan half the drivers came from Central Java.Similarly, the study by YTKI in 1987 foundthat 67.6 per cent of drivers came fromCentral Java. One explanation for thischange lies in the accelerated ruraldevelopment in West Java, which hasabsorbed more surplus labour in the regionthan has been the case in Central Java (Hilland Hardjono 1989).

An important change in the places oforigin of beca drivers between 1988–89 and1998 is the drop in the proportion fromCentral Java. Although about 90 per cent ofthe respondents came from West and CentralJava, the diversity at the district level, alongwith a significant proportion from coastalNorth Java, cannot be ignored. A growingproportion of beca drivers drawn from otherdistricts of West Java is evident. There areseveral reasons for this change. First, the ElNiño effect and the economic crisis hit ruralWest Java harder than the other regions.

Table 4 Respondents’ marital status and number of children, 1988–89 and 1998(per cent)

Unmarried MarriedChildren None 1–2 3–4 5+

1988–89 (n=312) 29.8 2.1 36.2 40.0 31.51998 (n=274) 12.1 6.4 39.1 29.6 12.8

Source: field studies in 1988–89 and 1998.



Kompas (5 January 1998; 22 January 1998)reported that the long dry season resultedin delayed rice planting in Karawang, andthousands of hectares of sawah weredrought-stricken for several months inBekasi. As the drought continued throughFebruary, the shortage of food becamecritical, even causing famine in rural areas(Bisnis Indonesia, 10 June 1998). Merdeka (4August 1998) reported the rural devastationin Cianjur, West Java; where only two litresof rice were left per household. Accordingto Republika (13 August 1998), 80 per cent ofthe villagers in Cirebon, West Java, weresuffering from shortages of staple foods.Increasing rice prices forced the villagers inTangerang to eat cassava (singkong) insteadof rice (Media Indonesia, 29 August 1998).

Chain migration and chainoccupation

Table 6 shows that the most important factorin migration to Jakarta remains the role offriends and kin, the phenomenon known aschain migration or chain occupation.

The 1988–89 survey showed that, uponentering Jakarta for the first time, mostmigrants stayed at a tauke’s house.Interestingly, 17.9 per cent of migrant becadrivers came from the same village as thetauke with whom they stayed and another20.2 per cent of them stayed with tauke whocame from the same sub-district. Thisstrongly supports the view of behaviouralmigration theory (Aswatini Anaf 1986:47–48; Hugo 1985a:93; Hugo et al. 1987:233–36).

Table 5 Areas of origin of the beca drivers (per cent)

Researcher DKI Pabel YTKI Azuma Azuma1978 1978 1987 1988–89 1998

Province/District of originCentral Java 31.2 31 67.6 56.7 43.6Tegal 14.1 9 n.a. 26.0 12.7Pemalang 0.8 2 n.a. 5.8 5.5Brebes 6.6 14 n.a. 2.9 8.4Others 8.7 6 n.a. 22.0 17.0West Java 55.6 72 22.9 37.5 45.8Indramayu 16.6 27 n.a. 19.2 13.1Bekasi 5.8 11 n.a. 5.8 1.5Cirebon 7.9 23 n.a. 3.8 4.0Karawang 12.0 9 n.a. 0 5.5Others 13.3 2 n.a. 8.7 21.7DKI 5.4 0 5.7 2.9 5.8Other regions 7.9 0 3.7 2.9 4.8Total 100 100 100 100 100(n=) (241) (100) (105) (312) (275)

Sources: field studies in 1988–89, 1998, DKI (1978:16–17), Pabel (1978:18) and YTKI (1987: Table 1–3).



Beca drivers from the same village tendedto operate in substantially the same districtin Jakarta. In Tanah Abang, Central Jakarta,for example, 24 out of 30 beca drivers camefrom Indramayu. Most of the respondentsstated that before moving to Jakarta, they hadinformation about beca driving and the lifein Jakarta, and had targeted this form of work.

There was a sharp decline in theimportance of village-based networks in the1998 survey, but the friends-and-relativeseffect is still evident. Over the interveningten years, the number who migrated alonehad increased slightly. More than 80 per centof the respondents obtained their beca-driving job within a week of arriving inJakarta with the assistance of friends orrelatives.

Sutiyoso’s decision to allow becaoperation in 1998 was broadcast throughoutJava, but about two-thirds of respondentsobtained the news from their friends andrelatives. More than half of the beca drivers(53.1 per cent) operating in 1998 had beenbeca drivers before the total ban in 1990.More than 80 per cent of the drivers whohad driven beca prior to the ban wereoperating in the same area where they rodebefore.

Previous occupation of beca drivers

Table 7 shows the change of occupation ofthe respondents over 14 years. In the 1988–89 survey, less than half of the beca drivershad been employed as agricultural labourersor farmers. Ten years later, the sharp increasein numbers of agricultural labourers andfarmers must be noted. The economic crisismay be a possible explanation. Some eightrespondents (2.9 per cent) had beenretrenched from various private companies.In total, 27 (18 per cent) had been dismissedfrom various job categories (see also Table12). In addition, the number of constructionworkers declined from 6.8 per cent in 1988–89 to 2.2 per cent in 1998. Many respondentssaid they had been retrenched from theconstruction, public, and transport sectors.The economic crisis was substantiallyresponsible for this change. Owing to large-scale retrenchment in the constructionindustry and other sectors, a lot of wagelabourers were forced to return to their homevillages, and were temporarily absorbed intothe farm sector (Johnson 1998:39; Kompas, 21January 1998). In this way, the proportion ofagricultural labourers or farmers jumpedfrom 46.6 per cent in 1988–89 to 62.4 per centin 1998.18 The village attracted retrenched

Table 6 With whom did you come to Jakarta the first time to drive beca?(per cent)

1988–89 1998

Friends/Brother 76.9 68.7Father 1.9 1.3Alone 14.4 18.0Relatives 4.7 6.7Others 2.0 5.3Total 100 (n=303) 100 (n=275)

Sources: field studies in 1988–89 and 1998



workers almost like a magnet. After they losttheir jobs in Jakarta, most people went backhome.

A second point is the significant declinein the number of vendors in Jakarta—from23.7 per cent in 1988–89 to 7.3 per cent in1998—despite the rapid increase in thenumber of small-scale traders in Jakarta. Themajor reason for the decline is the increasingcapital required and the greater fluctuationof commodity prices in Jakarta. However,there are some puzzling findings. Amongex-beca driver respondents, some 20.7 percent had been in various small-scale tradingjobs, but only 7.3 per cent were engaged intrading jobs immediately before returningto beca driving. This suggests that a largenumber of the respondents had abandonedtrading because of increasing competitionand difficulties in operating smallbusinesses.

Some respondents clung to beca driving.The category of ‘beca driving in other areas’jumped from 3.9 per cent to 12.7 per cent.They claimed that the freedom to work and

move was the major attraction of drivingbeca (narik beca bebas). It seems that theyenjoy beca driving, and know well how tocatch passengers. Understandably, their netincome is slightly higher than that of othergroups of drivers. Among them, the mostsignificant difference is that some 10 per centof the respondents previously rode beca inBotabek region—after the total ban in 1990,they were forced to move to the region.Declining income caused by the increasingnumber of beca in the other areas, as well asDBB policy in Tangerang and Bekasi, hadforced them to return to Jakarta (Kompas, 26June 1998; Suara Pembaruan, 26 June 1998).

According to the study by DKI (1978:20),59 per cent of respondents stated that theychose beca driving because it was easy toget the job. Beca driving skills wereconsidered easy to acquire. Jellinek (1991:59)suggests that the basic technique of becadriving can be learned in half an hour. Anadditional attraction was the freeaccomodation provided by the pondoksystem.

Table 7 Previous occupations of beca drivers

Researcher Suparman Azuma Azuma1984 1988-89 1998

Construction workers in Jakarta 13.1 6.8 2.2Beca driving in rural areas n.a. 3.9 12.7Vendor in Jakarta n.a. 23.7 7.3Agricultural labourer or farmer 53.8 46.6 62.4Unemployed 9.4 8.9 7.6Other 23.2 8.9 n.a.Unsure 0.5 1.3 n.a.Total (n=) 100 (383) 100 (303) 100 (275)

Sources: field studies in 1988–89, 1998 and Suparman (1984).



Educational attainment

Limited education is the major obstacle toobtaining formal sector jobs (cf. DKI1980:46–47; Pabel 1978:23; Suparman1984:19; YTKI 1987:Table 1-4). Beca driversin Jakarta have always possessed rather lowlevels of education.

Jones and Manning (1992:398–400)observed a significant improvement in thelevel of education in Indonesia under theNew Order. Census data for Jakarta (BPS1975; BPS and DKI 1992:40) show that, in theperiod 1971–90, the proportion of peoplewith no schooling decreased markedly—from 39.2 per cent in 1971 to 11 per cent in1990. Beca drivers, however, have clearly notshared in such ‘fruits of development’ (hasilpembangunan). Even the young beca driversgenerally do not have a primary education.Some 27.8 per cent of young beca driversreported that they had dropped out betweenyears 1–3 of primary school.

Table 8 compares respondents’educational attainment over ten years. Oey–Gardiner (1997:118–134) noted theremarkable achievement of the Indonesianeducation sector. To some extent, the data

in Table 8 support her position, but thedramatic improvements in Indonesianeducation were distributed very unevenlyamong the respondents. In 1996, about 60per cent of Jakarta residents were JuniorHigh School graduates or more, whereasonly 16 per cent of the respondents in my1998 survey had reached the same grade.

Data in Table 8 show that in 1988–89, 65per cent of beca drivers had failed tocomplete their primary education. Thereason for leaving school was generallyeconomic hardship in the village. Accordingto data from YTKI (1987:Table 1–4), whenasked the reasons for not continuing school,61.4 per cent of respondents answered ‘nofunds for schooling’. This implies that thebeca drivers’ family backgrounds were aspoorer villagers, such as agriculturallabourers and small scale peasants.

Land ownership

In Java, the definition of land sufficiency(cukupan) for household survival has beenthe subject of much argument. The issues aresummarised by Hardjono (1987:247) in termsof cukupan for one family. In the early

Table 8 Educational attainment: comparison of beca drivers and Jakartapopulation (per cent)

No Primary Primary Junior Seniorschooling school school high school high school + Total

not completed completed

Beca drivers1988-9a 19.1 46.0 21.1 11.0 1.8 1001998a 8.8 38.2 36.1 13.3 3.6 100

Jakarta population1996b 3.24 12.41 25.4 20.72 38.23 100

Notes: afield studies in 1988–89 (n=312), 1998 (n=249)b Includes only citizens of Jakarta over 10 years old. Kantor Statistiks DKI (1998:54) (n=7,736,844).



twentieth century, the adequate holding sizewas regarded as 0.7 hectares of sawah or 1.4hectares of dry land. 0.5 hectares of sawahor 2 hectares of dry land was consideredadequate to ensure a sufficient life in theearly post-war period. In the New Orderperiod, 0.7 hectares of rain-fed sawah and0.3 hectares of house garden (pekarangan)were defined as cukupan (Ananta et al.1986:135; Hugo 1981a:180). Hence, it can besaid that in Java, the most importantdefinition of rural economic welfaredepends on the amount of land owned(Wahono 1994:6–8).

In both 1988–89 and 1998 those who hadno land also had little education. Theproportion of those who had not completedprimary school was the largest among thoseowning less than 0.5 hectares. Needless tosay no-one among the wealthy group wasilliterate.

Among a substantial number of empiricalstudies on Jakarta’s informal sector, as wellas on rural–urban migration, few studiesundertake research on the farm-owningstatus of informal sector participants. Table9 shows that a large number of landless andsmall scale peasants migrate to Jakarta asinformal sector participants.

Table 10 indicates that 49.1 per cent ofmigrant beca drivers in 1988–89 did not ownfarmland (sawah garapan or lahan). 51.9 per

cent of drivers had some access to farmland,though most had access to less than 1hectare. Most respondents can be classifiedas poorer peasants below the standard ofcukupan. Compared with the other studiesof the informal sector, the proportion oflandless peasants (49.1 per cent) is relativelylow. This may be because those who had noland refused to be interviewed, whereasthose with farms were happy to participate.

The number of landless peasants amongthe respondents increased by nearly 30 percent between 1988–89 and 1998. Moreover,the number of small-scale farmers with 0.1–0.5 hectares as well as with 0.5–1.0 hectaresof farmland declined sharply. There is littledifference, however, in landowning statusby provincial origin. It is possible that becadrivers who had previously been peasantsor small scale farmers were more confidentabout speaking openly in the atmosphere ofReformasi than they had been in the earliersurvey.

The very high proportion of landlesspeasants among beca drivers in 1998 reflectschanges caused by crises which particularlyaffected the Javanese countryside—theeconomic downturn and the drought causedby El Niño. Nearly a quarter of therespondents from various districts of ruralJava reported harvest failure (panen gagal)during 1997 or had only one harvest during

Table 9 The landless ratio of rural–urban migrants to Jakarta (per cent)

Researcher Suharso et al. DKI Said Rusli Samuel1976 1980 1984 1984

Landless 70.6 73.2 63.5 79.0

Sources: Suharso et al. (1976:39–40), Said Rusli1984:87, DKI (1980:61–62), and Samuel (1984:26–27).



1998. 19 Other structural factors hit paddyagriculture in Java. The inflated price offertiliser (urea) from Rp 500/kg to Rp 1,115/kg, caused by the inefficient delivery systemof KUD (Korperasi Unit Desa (villagecooperation unit), brought about a desperateshortage of cash income for the small scalefarmers (Kompas, 8 December 1998;Manning and Jayasuriya 1996:29). Pesticideprices soared (Suara Pembaruan, 7 January1998; Soetrisno 1999:166). One large scalefarmer, for example, rode beca for the firsttime to raise cash for purchasing fertiliserand pesticide.

Mobility determinants

‘Pull factors’ in migration are often diverse.There may be several factors that pull aperson to migrate. Wage employment,however, is pre-eminent among the reasons.Table 11 shows the percentage of

rural-urban migrants in several previousstudies who became involved in urbaninformal sector jobs for economic reasons.

The specific reasons for migration in 1998were the El Niño effect and the economiccrisis. Table 12 shows that in the 1998 surveythe most frequently stated reason formigration was ‘looking for subsistence food’(cari nafkah), and only a few respondentsanswered that they were ‘looking forexperience’ (cari pengalaman). The secondmost frequently cited reason was the betterincome that could be derived from becadriving jobs in Jakarta. The third mostcommon reason was poor job opportunitiesin drivers’ villages (Suara Pembaruan, 7 July1998).

The increased number of unemployed inJakarta has expanded the market for a cheapmode of transport. At the same time, thesupply of potential beca drivers has been

Table 11 Migrants who came to Jakarta for economic reasons (per cent)

Researcher Heeren UI Supranto Suharso Azuma Kartini-et al. Sjahrir

1955 1976 1979 1981 1988–89 1990

Percentage 74.4 62.8 94.8 65.4 98.1 78.0

Sources: Heeren (1955:708), Senat Mahasiswa UI (1976:10), Supranto (1979:Table 5); Suharso et al.(1981:7–8), field study in 1988–89, and Kartini–Sjahrir (1990:60).

Table 10 Beca drivers’ ownership of farmland, 1988–89 and 1998 (per cent)

Area of land owned (ha) 1988–89 1998

No farm land 49.1 77.70.1–0.5 32.3 13.10.5–1.0 15.7 5.01.0–2.0 2.0 3.12.0+ 1.9 1.1Total (n= ) 100 (303) 100 (260)

Sources: field study in 1998



bolstered by the collapse of the economy,which has limited the number of alternativeformal and informal sector jobs available forthose with poor connections and littleeducation (Jones and Mamas 1996:69).

Microeconomic characteristics ofbeca drivers

The 1988–89 survey shows that 99.7 per centof the respondents worked every day exceptwhen physically ill or when beca vehicleswere unavailable. Beca driving necessitatesworking long hours, because much time isspent waiting at the beca station looking forpassengers.

The nominal net income per day for becadrivers has increased sharply, but realincome has fallen substantially. In the 1988–89 survey, for example, nearly half of therespondents earned more than Rp 3,000(6.2kg of rice equivalent) per day. The 1998survey, however, shows that only 7.6 percent of beca drivers earned more than Rp15,000 (5.6kg of rice equivalent). Previously,only 7.6 per cent of drivers fell into the

lowest income category, but the proportionof drivers in this category has now jumpedto 16.7 per cent. The net daily earnings ofvulnerable people have tended to fall overthe past decade, but it would be rathersimplistic to conclude on this basis that becadriving is no longer profitable. There is apuzzling aspect to the research findings—the proportion of drivers in the middleincome category (4.1–6.2kg of rice equivalentin 1988–89, 3.7–5.6kg rice equivalent in 1998)increased from 20.2 per cent to 49.8 per cent.

In 1998, about half of the respondentsenjoyed a net income of more than Rp 10,000per day. However, presenting therespondents’ money income per day israther problematical owing to considerableincreases in the price of basic commodities(harga sembilan bahan pokok) as well as thesmaller number of beca vehicles than before.For example, the retail price of rice soaredfrom Rp 1,290/kg in January to Rp 2,700/kg in November (Johnson 1998:Table 3; SuaraPembaruan, 12 November 1998). It isworthwhile, however, to grasp the changein net income since 1988–89. Table 13

Table 12 Major reasons for riding beca in Jakarta

Reasons per cent responded ‘yes’

Cari nafkah (looking for subsistence food) 90Better income of beca driving 68.7Poor job opportunities in the villages 67.3No other jobs in Jakarta 66.7Economic crisis (Krismon) 53.3Followed friends or kin 34Harvest failed (panen gagal) 25.3Retrenchment 18Looking for experience (cari pengalaman) 3.3Must repay the debt 2.7

Source: field study in 1998



presents a comparison of net daily incomesin 1988–89 and 1998 based on the litre of riceequivalent. The net daily income of becadrivers has clearly begun to bunch aroundthe lower end of the range.

Many respondents claimed that becadriving brought a secure daily income forthem. This is especially true when comparedwith on-farm work which is subject todrastic seasonal variations. Though incomemay have declined over the years, whatremains is highly valued given the currenteconomic crisis and drought in rural Java. Alarge number of beca drivers insisted thatbeca operation in Jakarta should be legalisedat least until the economic crisis eased,otherwise a rescue program would be neededto provide JPS (Jaring Pengaman Sosial (Socialsecurity net funds)) (Kompas, 16 April 1999).Some beca drivers expressed anxiety aboutthe further decline of net earnings causedby the growth of the Mikrolet transportsystem. This growing competition fromother means of transport was causing a greatdeal of frustration among beca drivers. Theincreasing cost of essential items after thecrisis only compounded this frustration.

Rural–urban wage gap

According to microeconomic migrationmodels, especially the Harris and Todaromodel, labour migration occurs from lowincome areas (villages) to higher incomeareas (cities). Economists have emphasisedthe importance of expected wage differencesbeteen rural and urban areas as a primarymotivation in the migration decision.

The rural wage is hard to generalisebecause of the diversity of share croppingratios and different wage systems. In the1988–89 survey, the majority of the workingpopulation (87.7 per cent) received a dailywage between Rp 1,000 and Rp 2,000. Whenthis is compared with the net earnings frombeca driving (Rp 1,000–4,999), few clearwage gaps can be seen. More importantly,though, the agricultural sector is seriouslylimited in providing a secure daily job. Forexample, 8.7 per cent of migrant beca driverscame from single crop areas, 57.6 per cent ofthem were from double-crop areas and 33.7per cent of them came from areas whichenjoyed three harvests a year (palawija). Thismeans that on-farm jobs can be provided in

Table 13 Comparison of net income of beca drivers per day, 1988–89 and 1998

Income in 1988–89 (Rp) 500– 1,000– 2,000– 3,000– 5,000+999 1,999 2,999 4,999

Litre of rice equivalent 1.3–2.6 2.6–4.1 4.1–6.2 6.2–10.3 10.3+Drivers (per cent, n=312) 7.6 28.8 20.2 27.9 15.4

Income in 1998 (Rp) 1,500– 6,000– 10,000– 15,000– 20,000+5,999 9,999 14,999 19,999

Litre of Rice equivalent 5.6–2.2 2.2–3.7 3.7–5.6 5.6–7.4 7.4+Drivers (per cent, n=275) 16.7 25.9 49.8 6.5 1.1

Note: 1 litre of rice price was Rp 484 in 1988-89, Rp 2,700 in November 1998Source: field studies in 1988–89 and 1998



land preparation and harvest between oneand three times a year only. Hence, it can beanticipated that under-employment ordisguised unemployment is a significantproblem for most of the year. In contrast, asargued earlier, beca driving can ensure asecure, regular income. As a result, asignificant rural–urban wage gap exists interms of ensuring daily job opportunitiesrather than absolute daily income.

In 1998, 46.7 per cent of the respondentsearned Rp 5,000–6,999 for a full day of farmwork (harian), whereas more than half ofthem received Rp 3,000–4,000 for a half-day’swork (bedugan). The sharecropping ratiovaries from region to region: one-fifth or one-sixth to the harvesters was the dominantsharecropping ratio in West Java, whereas itwas one-tenth in Central Java. Thesesharecropping ratios precisely paralleled thefindings in the 1988–89 survey. A substantialincrease in on-farm wages in rural Java wasevident, but wage increases were still unableto keep up with the skyrocketing price ofrice (Rp 1,567/kg in April 1998) (Johnson1998:Table 3).

The alternatives after the total ban of1990 and July 1999 election

Table 14 presents the alternatives to becadriving after the total ban of 1990. Themajority of respondents preferred to ‘goback to the village’. This implies that someopportunities were available for on or off-farm work in their home villages.20 Since thelifting of the ban, however, beca drivers havegenerally not made long term plans. Theysay ‘Capek pikir daripada narik’ (to be worriedabout the future is more wearisome thandriving beca) (Kompas, 26 October 1988).Their lives and work are organised on a day-to-day basis. Their main concern remainsearning for today alone, rather than thinkingand planning for tomorrow. It is difficult tosay whether this is good or bad—perhapstheir future is too bleak to think about.

Why do beca drivers return to theirvillages instead of settling in Jakarta?Temple (1974:114) states that ‘only trishawriders would prefer to go back to theirvillages, most often because their wives arethere’. However, most vendors also left their

Table 14 Alternatives to beca driving after the total ban of 1990 (per cent)

Researcher Suparman Kompas Azuma Yusuf and Kurniawan(1984) (1988) (1988–89) (1991)

Return to villages 58.7 34.3 39.8 45.2Unsure 1.0 24.0 15.5 5.5Look for a job in Jakarta n.a. 18.3 14.6 33.9Look for a job anywhere 17.7 20.2 8.7 n.a.Ride beca in another place n.a. n.a. 9.7 11.5Transmigration 6.9 n.a. 0 n.a.Other 15.7 3.0 11.7 15.4Total (n=) 100 (382) 100 (500) 100 (308) 100 (108)

Sources: field study in 1988–89, Suparman (1978:Table 15), Kompas (13 January 1990) and Yusuf andKurniawan (1992:59).



families behind in their villages. A similarresponse was evident in the 1998 survey.Table 15 reveals the alternatives to becadriving after the election in June 1999. In the1988–89 survey, 39.8 per cent of therespondents preferred to go back to thevillages; a similar finding was evident in the1998 survey.

Most beca drivers in Jakarta rode beca inother places after the total ban was imposedin 1990. A rather agressive response towardscrackdowns is becoming extremely frequent.More than half of the beca drivers said thatthey would fight TRAMTIB, if their vehiclewas confiscated. They no longer suffer insilence, but express their ideas.

In the last crackdown, I just bit my finger(gigi jari) and experienced crackdownwithout resistance. But now, I am different.I will fight them until I die. I am not scaredthis time. If beca driving is banned, howcan I feed my family in the village? Thereis no secure job in the village because ofdrought. Death by hunger is the same asby fighting.21

Circular migration

Previous studies of beca drivers in Jakartafound that the pattern of movement can becharacterised as circular migration. In theearly 1970s, Papanek (1976:62–64) found that66.2 per cent of sampled beca driversreturned to their villages every year.Moreover, 23.6 per cent went back to theirvillages more than five times a year, and 20.8per cent returned between three and fivetimes a year. Hence, since the early 1970s,circulation has been a significant dimensionof beca drivers’ migration pattern.

Table 16 provides some basic data on thefrequency of visits to the home village, byregion. In general, geographical distance canbe identified as a major obstacle to moving;the transport cost and journey time isdirectly related to journey distance. In theWest Java region it can take up to 6 hours toreturn to villages from Jakarta, whereas theother regions require at least 8 hours andeven up to 15 hours. This factor is also amajor obstacle to circulation. Table 16indicates that drivers from Central Java are

Table 15 Alternatives to beca driving in case of total ban after the election

Reasons by order per cent responded ‘Yes’Look for job in village 68.7Look for job in Jakarta 68.0Fight if confiscated 56.0Return to village 53.3Ride a beca in other place 40.0Unsure 28.0Demonstrate 10.0

Source: field study in 1998.



likely to return to their home villages lessfrequently than those who come from WestJava. Clearly, distance is a major factos inmigrants' patterns of return to the homevillage. The cost in terms of transportcharges and time spent travelling boviouslydeters frequent journeys to the more distantregions of rural Java.

In the 1998 survey, circular migration wasstill evident, but its nature had changedsubstantially. Table 16 shows that theproportion of West Javanese visiting homeevery 1–2 weeks more than doubled,whereas the number who visited every 1–2months shrank acutely in 1998. Beca driverswho sleep on their beca—some 26.2 per centof all respondents—understandably returnhome more frequently than kontrakresidents, who may only return to theirvillages once a year for the Islamic holidayof Ramadan. This is an economically rationaldecision. The rent for kontrak costs aminimum of Rp 10,000 a month, so thosewho reside in the kontrak are likely tominimise the frequency of their return.

Table 16 shows that circular migration isnot giving way to permanent migration, butto other forms of mobility where there ismore than just one rural and urbandestination. This is indicated by the fact thatthe proportion of beca drivers returning atone-to-two-weekly intervals more thandoubled—the bulk of this being respondentsfrom West Java. At the same time, theproportion returning at intervals longer thanthree months had expanded about threefoldin West Java, and substantially in CentralJava and elsewhere in 1998. The emergenceof this trend was foreseen by Forbes(1981:68) who argued that if the wage laboursector in urban areas expanded and the ruralagricultural sector became morecommercialised, circular migration mightchange to another form of mobility. 29.4 percent of respondents who had been employedin Jakarta before becoming beca drivers hadbeen employed in the city for more thanthree months. They tended to take theirfamily to Jakarta, and nearly half of themseldom participated in on-farm jobs.

Table 16 The frequency of return to the village, 1988–89 and 1998 (per cent)

1–2 2 weeks– 1–2 2–3 3 Totalweeks 1 month months months months+

1988–89West Java 8.2 21.4 5.1 1.0 2.1 37.8Central Javaand others 2.0 25.5 20.4 8.2 6.1 62.2Total (n=294) 10.2 46.9 25.5 9.2 8.2 100

1998West Java 21.4 14.4 3.7 2.0 9.8 51.3Central Javaand others 3.3 22.5 5.7 0.4 16.8 48.7Total (n=244) 24.7 36.9 9.4 2.4 26.6 100




Moreover, the length of stay in the villagehas been decreasing compared to before. Inthe 1988–89 study, 51.9 per cent of therespondents stayed in the village for morethan eight days, whereas only 15.4 per centof the respondents stayed more than eightdays in 1998.

The other factor in frequency of return isthe cost of transport. Table 17 reveals thetransport costs of return visits (door-to-door)from the 1988–89 and 1998 surveys. Thenominal amount of rupiah must be analysedcarefully. A comparison of transport costwith the rise in the cost of necessary itemsreveals that transport between Jakarta andvillages in West Java has actually becomemore affordable (Kompas, 8 May 1998; BisnisIndonesia, 19 May 1998; Republika, 19 May1998).

Beca drivers set monetary targets for howmuch to remit to the villages. They drivebeca every day until their target is achieved.Table 18 shows that in 1988–89, more thanhalf of migrant beca drivers take backbetween Rp 20,000 and Rp 59,999 when theyreturn to their village. Because of thehyperinflation in the late 1990s, it is hard topresent an accurate comparison ofremittances in 1988–89 and 1998. Althoughthe nominal amount of remittances

increased sharply, the actual value of thatremittance has fallen substantially in termsof the rice price equivalent—a findingreinforced in Table 13, which reveals sharplydeclining daily net income. Cash flow fromJakarta to rural areas has fallensubstantially.

Money is remitted through a system ofmutual assistance (gotong royong) in whichearnings are entrusted with fellow villagersreturning home. Almost every weeksomeone goes back. This system does notwork for beca drivers from distant places,such as East Java, Yogyakarta, and the outerislands, because there are fewer drivers fromthe same village. Post office remittances (PosWesel) are rarely used, except by more highlyeducated beca drivers and those who wereunable to trust their colleagues. In 1998,methods of remittance had not changed: thebeca drivers from West Java were still likelyto take their money back themselves, andthose from Central Java had a tendency toask their friends to take it back (titip teman).According to economic migration theory,urban-to-rural remittances play a significantrole in terms of restoring equilibrium in therural–urban wage gap and may contributeto rural development through the trickle-down effect (Stark 1991:216–17).

Table 17 The transport cost for return in 1988–89 and 1998 (per cent)

1988–89 (Rp) 500– 5,001– 10,001– 20,001+5,000 10,000 20,000

Litre of rice equivalent 1.3–10.3 10.3–20.7 20.7–41.3 41.3+per cent (n=294) 31.9 40.9 24.2 3.1

1998 (Rp) 500– 30,000– 50,000– 100,000+29,999 49,999 99,999

Litre of rice equivalent 1.9–11.1 11.1–18.5 18.5–37 37+per cent (n=237) 48.5 28.7 16.0 1.8




Prospects

According to a survey by Republika (11September 1998) of 1,000 beca passengers inJakarta, some 86 per cent supported theirrenewed operation, claiming they weredesperate for more affordable, flexible, andspacious transport. The 14 per cent who didnot support renewed beca operation citedmany reasons—‘inhumane’, ‘cause trafficjams’, ‘hard to ban again’ and ‘securityconcern’. Respondents were mostlyresidents in lower middle-class suburbs, andgenerally comprised traders, housewivesand civil servants. Unless a much betterpublic transport system is established, becawill continue to fill the transport needs ofthe lower-middle class in Jakarta.

The long term policy towards beca hasentered a period of uncertainty after the June1999 election. The current situation is morestable than before, because there is littlelikelihood of confiscation, but governmentpolicy remains unpredictable. For example,Governor Sutiyoso again refused to abolishPerda No. 11/1988 on 15 April 1999 (Kompas,16 April 1999). In the back alleys, a lot ofMikrolet and Minibus are operating wherethe main operation areas of beca used to be.

In addition, the number of ojek speda andmotor drivers has soared, providing part-time jobs for poorly-paid public servants andretrenched urban labourers (Suara Karya, 18February 1998). Beca vehicles are becomingincreasingly marginalised by these old andnew competitors. Also, tauke are morecautious about adding to the number of becabecause of the uncertain future andincreasing competition with other urbanback-alley transport. If the economic crisisshould worsen, passengers might choosemore affordable but inflexible forms oftransport, such as Mikrolet and Minibus;and beca drivers’ earnings would decline.

One source of support for beca driverscomes from the current influential Ministerfor Cooperation and Small Scale Industry,Adi Sasono. In 1990, he was verysympathetic to beca drivers, and attackedthe constitutionality of garokan, saying: ‘The1945 Constitution states that every citizenhas the right to work. What governorWiyogo is doing is destroying work.’ Localby-laws recognised beca elimination, but, ashe noted, ‘how can local by-laws be ratedhigher than the Constitution?’ (Tempo, 3February 1990).

Table 18 Remittances in 1988–89 and 1998 (per cent)

1988–89 (Rp) 0–9,999 10,000– 20,000– 40,000– 60,000+19,999 39,999 59,999

Litre of rice equivalent 20.7 20.7–41.3 41.3–82.6 82.6–128.8 128.8+per cent (n=294) 1.1 15.2 35.8 29.9 18.0

1998 (Rp) 0– 50,000– 100,000– 200,000– 300,000+49,999 99,999 199,999 299,999

Litre of rice equivalent 18.5 18.5–37 37–74.1 74.1–111.1 111.1+per cent (n=237) 12.7 22.4 41.3 15.2 8.4

Sources: field studies in 1988–89 and 1998.



I have been observing the fate of urbanpeasants in Jakarta since the mid 1980s, andhave seen much graffiti on beca, whichencapsulated their insecure feelings.Presumably, ‘Beri aku jalan’ (give mepathway) may be the most appropriatewords for the current situation. Harshgarokan is unlikely to be tolerated becauseof the increasing awareness of human rights,and the support from NGOs under theReformasi. However, inconsistent policytowards beca makes beca drivers feelinsecure, their future never free fromuncertainty. In this context, the position ofbeca drivers has not changed over ten years.Sooner or later, human-powered transportmight disappear from Jakarta. In the eightyear absence of beca, other means oftransport took over their traditionaloperating areas. This suggests that it maybe dificult to expand the operation ofhuman-powered transport into other partsof the capital. If anything, the DKI shouldorganise a more user-friendly publictransport system in the lower-class suburbs,and offer beca the opportunity to fill theremaining niches of the urban publictransport system.

Notes

1 This paper is partly derived from Chapter 4 ofan unpublished PhD thesis (Azuma 1994),and major updating is based on a field studyfrom October to December 1998 during myvisiting fellowship at Demography Program,Research School of Social Sciences, TheAustralian National University. The authoris grateful for helpful comments from refereesat early draft of this paper.

2 In my experience the phrase ‘tukang beca’ isused as a pejorative term in Jakarta.

3 Literally, garokan means scratch (garok) inJavanese (garuk in Indonesian) (Echols andShadily 1982:118; Prawiroatmojo 1981:130).This term is used as a synonym for theelimination of beca. It is also one of the stepsof weeding in farm jobs.

4 Major General Sutiyoso was born in December1943 in Semarang, Central Java. He was agraduate of Magelang military academy, andmostly promoted in elite courses in themilitary. This resulted in a ratherirresponsible attitude towards the poor. Hisfinal position in the army was Commanderof Jakarta special region (Pandan Jayag)between 1996 and 1997 (Bisnis Indonesia, 7October 1997).

5 Their frustration towards Mikrolet resulted inan attack on two Mikrolet in Tanjung Priokdistrict. Beca drivers insisted that theoperation of Mikrolet in Tanjung Priok mustbe limited until six o’clock in the evening inorder to share the passengers (Kompas, 11January 1999).

6 On 7 October 1998, I interviewed a Tramtibofficer of the DKI on this issue. He refused tocomment on beca. What he said was ‘nggakmau pikir lagi soal beca’ (I don’t want to thinkabout beca).

7 Jellinek (1991:63) reports that since the mid1980s several people in the kampung shestudied had become owners of beca.

8 The transport fee depends on negotiation priorto boarding. In general, rates are set by thebeca drivers themselves (Ocampo 1982:50).In 1983, Suparman (1984:18) found the costwas about Rp150–300 for a one-way trip. Inmy 1988–89 survey, the most common chargefor a one-way trip was Rp200–300. In 1998,as a result of hyperinflation, the fee hadjumped to Rp500–1,000 for a trip.



9 The cost of these facilities cannot be ignored, asthe charge for the public bathroom (WCumum) was Rp 50-150 in 1988-89 and Rp 500in 1998. Although a large number of becadrivers frequently use walls and canals andso forth as a toilet, taking a bath and washingrequire a WC umum.

10 However, a study by Hugo (1981a:222) in themid 1970s provides questionable evidencethat the majority reside in dormitoryaccommodation (asrama) provided by themiddleman from whom they rented theirbeca.

11 Interview with Mrs Lea Kin Hua, 21 April,1989.

12 Malapetaka Sebelas Januari: January disaster, thedemonstration on 11 January 1974

13 A project to throw confiscated beca vehiclesinto Jakarta Bay to form a man-made reef.

14 Regarding the compensation for beca loss,serious fights between owners and rentersbegan to take place. Tauke requestedcompensation for beca vehicles which wereconfiscated and allegedly thrown into JakartaBay. Few beca drivers, however, could affordto pay for such an expensive vehicle. Thealternative was to simply leave town (dibawakabur). This practice meant that tauke oftencollected a higher rental fee as insurance, andrecruited drivers from the same sub-districtor village as a countermeasure (YTKI,1987:I-7).

15 The cost of one small package is Rp 500, and itcan be used twice.

16 The studies by DKI (1978:9-11), Suparman(1984:17-18) and YTKI (1987:Table 1) find thatthe job requires relatively high body strength,and therefore the most productive age grouptended to take part in beca driving. A studyin Bandung conducted by Hyodo (1988:197),on beca drivers’ body constitution andmuscle strength, shows that beca driving

requires relatively high energy. Even takingaccount of the significant differences betweenupland (Bandung) and flatlands (Jakarta),without adequate body strength it is hard topedal a beca.

17 In Java, a well-known proverb states that if youhave many children you do not have to beworried about earning an income in your oldage (banyak anak banyak rejeki or anak nggawarejekine dhewe-dhewe) (Geertz 1963:83).

18 In 1998, eight per cent of respondents currentlyhad additional income sources in the informalsector in Jakarta, which is a slight declinefrom 11.5 per cent in 1988–89.

19 Data in Table 12 show that 25.3 per cent of therespondents claimed harvest failure was themain reason underlying the choice to ridebeca.

20 Understandably, farm owning respondents aremore likely to return to their villages. Incontrast, only 14.9 per cent of landlessrespondents in the author’s survey repliedthat they would return to their villages.Landless respondents were more likely tochoose jobs in Jakarta.

21 Unlike in 1990, NGOs helped to protect becadrivers’ human rights. For example, the LegalAid Institute supported the return ofconfiscated beca from Cakung, and the UrbanPoor Consortium is trying to abolish PerdaNo.11/1988 in order to allow beca operation(Jakarta Post, 6 October 1998; Kompas, 16 April1999). Clearly, civilian society is emerging insome parts of Indonesia.



References

Abeyasekere, S., 1987. Jakarta: a history,Oxford University Press, Singapore.

Ananta et al. 1986. ‘Mobilitas Pekerja dariSektor Pertanian dan PemmanfaatanSektor Informal: Suatu Dugaan danSaran’, in Anwar dkk., (eds), EkonomiIndonesia Masalah dan Prospek 1986/1987,UI Press, Jakarta:133–62.

Aswatini Anaf, 1986. Female Migration andEmployment (A case Study in KecamatanPasar Rebo, Jakarta), LIPI, Jakarta.

Azuma, Y., 1994. Beca drivers in Jakarta:astudy of rural–urban circular migrantsfrom Indramayu, West Java and Tegal,Central Java. Unpublished PhD Thesis,Flinders University of South Australia,Adelaide.

BPS, 1975. Sensus Penduduk, 1971 Series E,Penduduk Jakarta, BPS, Jakarta.

BPS and DKI, 1978. Kaki Lima, HasilPencacahan Pedagang Kaki Lima di DKIJakarta, BPS and DKI, Jakarta.

BPS and DKI, 1992. Sensus Penduduk, DKIJakarta 1990, BPS and DKI, Jakarta.

Castles, L., 1967. ‘The ethnic profile ofDjakarta’, Indonesia, 3:153–204.

Critchfield, R., 1970a. Hello Mister Where AreYou Going? Part I, Alica PattersonFoundation, New York.

Crichfield, R., 1970b. Hello Mister Where AreYou Going? Part II, Alica PattersonFoundation, New York.

Daroesman, R., and Weideman, A., 1983.‘The role of newspaper advertisementsin employment recruitment in Jakarta’,Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies,18(3):116–20.

Dick, H., 1981. ‘Urban public transport:Jakarta, Surabaya and Malang, Part II’,Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies,17(2):72–88.

Djauhari, D., and Soejono, 1988. MaizeProduction in Java: prospects for improvedfarm-level production technology, RegionalCooperation Centre for Research andDevelopment of Coarse Grains, Pules,Roots and Tuber Crops in the HumidTropics of Asia and Pacific, Bogor,Indonesia.

DKI, 1978. Becak, Hasil Penelitian PengemudiBecak Di DKI Jakarta, DKI, Jakarta.

DKI, 1980. Penduduk Musiman: PenelitianMigrasi Sirkuler di DKI Jakarta, 1979, DKI,Jakarta.

DKI, 1988. Program Penyelesaian MasalahBecak di DKI Jakarta, mimeo, BiroKetertiban, Jakarta.

Echols, J. and Shadily, H., 1982. AnIndonesian-English Dictionary, CornellUniversity Press, New York.

Evans, K., 1999. ‘Economic update’, in G.Forrester (ed.), Post-Soeharto Indonesia:renewal of chaos?, Indonesia Assessment1998, Crawford House Publishing,Bathurst: 105–27.

Forbes, D., 1978. ‘Urban–ruralinterdependence: the trishaw riders ofUjung Pandang’, in P.J. Rimmer D.W.Drakakis-Smith and T.G. McGee (eds),Food, Shelter and Transport in SoutheastAsia and the Pacific, Department ofHuman Geography, Australian NationalUniversity:219–36.

Forbes, D., 1979. Development and the‘informal’ sector: a study of peddlers andtrishaw riders in Ujung Pandang,Indonesia. PhD Thesis, MonashUniversity, Melbourne.



Forbes, D., 1981. ‘Mobility and unevendevelopment in Indonesia: a critique ofexplanations of migration and circularmigration’, in G. Jones and H. Richter(eds), Population Mobility andDevelopment: Southeast Asia and the Pacific,Australian National University:51–70.

Forbes, D., 1990. ‘Jakarta towards 2005:planning mechanisms and issues’,Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies,26(3):111–20.

Fuke, Y., 1986. ‘Nishi Jawa no DekasegiNomin’, (Circular migrants of Peasantsfrom Padalek, West Java), Asia Kenkyu,32(3–4).

Geertz, C., 1963. Agricultural Involution: theprocesses of ecological changes in Indonesia,University of California Press, Berkeley.

Hardjono, J., 1987. Land, Labour andLivelihood in A West Java Village, UGMPress, Yogyakarta.

Hardjono, J., and Hill, H., 1989. “West Java:population pressure and regionaldiversity’, in H. Hill (ed.), Unity andDiversity, Oxford University Press,Singapore:255–91.

Heeren, J., 1955. ‘The urbanization ofDjakarta’, Ekonomi dan KeuanganIndonesia, 8(11):696–736.

Hetler, C., 1986. Female-headed householdsin a circular migration village in CentralJava, Indonesia. PhD Thesis, AustralianNational University.

Hill, H., 1988. ‘The world according to B.J.Habibie’, Inside Indonesia 1986 No.15July:9-10.

Hill, H., 1998. ‘The Indonesian economy: thestrange and sudden death of a tiger’, inG. Forrester and R.J. May (eds) The Fallof Soeharto, Crawford House Publishing,Bathurst:93–103.

Hill, H., and Hardjono, J., 1989. ‘West Java:population pressure and regionaldiversity’, in H. Hill (ed.), Unity andDiversity: regional economic development inIndonesia since 1970, Oxford UniversityPress:255–82.

Hugo, G., 1981a. Population Mobility in WestJava, UGM Press, Yogyakarta.

Hugo, G., 1981b. ‘Road transport,population mobility and development inIndonesia’, in G. Jones and H. Richter(eds), Population Mobility andDevelopment: Southeast Asia and the Pacific,Monograph 27, National Centre forDevelopment Studies, AustralianNational University:335–86.

Hugo, G., 1985a. ‘Circulation in West Java,Indonesia’, in R.M. Prothero and M.Chapman (eds), Circulation in Third WorldCountries, Routledge and Kegan Paul,London:75–99.

Hugo, G., 1985b. ‘Structural change andlabour mobility in rural Java’, in G.Standing (ed.), Labour Circulation and theLabour Process, Croom Helm, London:46–88.

Hugo, G. et al. 1987. The DemographicDimension in Indonesian Development,Oxford University Press, Singapore.

Hyodo, K., 1988. ‘Physique and musclestrength of becak drivers in BandungCity, West Java, Indonesia’, SoutheastAsian Studies, 25(4):562–69.

Jellinek, L., 1977. ‘The pondok of Jakarta’,Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies,13:67–71.

Jellinek, L., 1978. ‘Circular migration andpondok dwelling system’, in P.J. RimmerD.W. Drakakis-Smith and T.G. McGee(eds), Food, Shelter and Transport inSoutheast Asia and the Pacific, Departmentof Human Geography, AustralianNational University:135–54.



Jellinek, L., 1987. Kebun Kacang: an oralhistory of a poor inner-city communityin Jakarta, from the 1930s to the 1980s.PhD Thesis, Monash University,Melbourne.

Jellinek, L., 1991. The Wheel of Fortune, thehistory of a poor community in Jakarta, Allenand Unwin, Sydney.

Johnson, C., 1998. ‘Survey of recentdevelopments’, Bulletin of IndonesianEeconomic Studies, 34(2):3–60.

Jones, G., 1985. ‘Further research areas onmigration and development in ASEANcountries’, in D. Hauser, D. Suits and N.Ogawa (eds), Urbanization and Migrationin ASEAN Development, NIRA,Tokyo:147–66.

Jones, G., and Manning, C., 1992. ‘Labourforce and employment during the 1980s’,in A. Booth (ed.), The Oil Boom and After:Indonesian economic policy and performancein the Soeharto era, Oxford UniversityPress, Singapore:363–410.

Jones, G., and Mamas, G., 1996. ‘Thechanging employment structure of theextended Jakarta metropolitan region’,Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies,32(1):51–70.

Kantor Statistik DKI, 1997. Jakarta DalamAngka 1997, DKI, Jakarta.

Kartini-Sjahrir, 1990. Workers in theIndonesian construction industry: laborrecruitment and rural–urban migration.PhD Thesis, Boston University, Boston.

Kawamoto, I., 1985. ‘Background andcharacteristics of migration to urbanareas in Java’, South East Asian Studies,23(1):44–59.

Kitajima, O., 1990. ‘Syomin no Ashi Rintaku(Pedicab as a Public Transport)’, inHenbou suru Asia, NIEs ASEAN noKaihatsu to chiiki henyo,(Asia in Transition:NIEs and ASEAN development and regionaltransformation), Asia chiri kenkyukan,Kokon shoin, Tokyo:132–33

Kodiran, 1983. ‘Kebudayaan Jawa’, inKoentjaraningrat (ed.), Manusia danKebudayaan Indonesia, PenerbitDjambatan, Jakarta:327–45.

Koentjaraningrat, 1974. ‘MobilitasPenduduk Sekitar Jakarta’, MasyarakatIndonesia, 1,2:45–60.

Kuntjoro–Jakti, D., 1976. ‘Pemukiman bagiGolongan Berpenghasilan Rendah:Sebuah Gambaran Umum’, Prisma, 6:89–96.

Leuwol, E., 1988. ‘Migran Sirkuler ’, inAhamad Sahur et al. (eds), Migrasi,Kolonisasi, Perubahan Sosial, PustakaGrafika Kita, Jakarta:49–103.

Lindblad, J., 1997. ‘Survey of recentdevelopments’, Bulletin of IndonesianEconomic Studies, 33(3):3–34.

Lubis, M., 1983. Twilight in Djakarta, OxfordUniversity Press, Kuala Lumpur.

Manning, C., 1986. Changing OccupationalStructure, Urban Work and LandowningClass: a case study from rural West Java,Centre for Development Studies, FlindersUniversity, Adelaide.

Manning, C., and Jayasuriya, S., 1996.‘Survey of recent developments’, Bulletinof Indonesian Economic Studies, 32(2):3–44.

Matsumura, M., 1986. Koko ha Indonesia (Thisis Indonesia), NHK, Tokyo.



Miles, R., 1991. ‘Migration to Britain: thesignificance of a historical approach’,International Migration, 29(4):527–44.

Murai, Y., 1982. Chisana Tami Karano Hasso(A View from Ordinary People),Jijitsushin-sha, Tokyo.

Naim, M., 1979. Merantau, Pola Migrasi sukuMinangkabau, UGM Press, Yogyakarta.

Ocampo, R., 1982. Low-cost Transport in Asia:a comparative report on five cities,IDRC-183e, Canada.

Oey-Gardiner, 1997. ‘Educationaldevelopments, achievements andchallenges’, in G. Jones and T. Hull (eds),Indonesia Assessment, Population andHuman Resources, Australian NationalUniversity/Institute of Southeast AsianStudies, Singapore.

Pabel, M., 1978. Respons Pengemudi BecakTerhadap Peraturan Daerah Bebas Becak,Studi Kasus Pengemudi Becak di JakartaTimur DKI. BA Thesis, UI, Jakarta.

Papanek, G., 1975. ‘The poor of Jakarta’,Economic Development and CulturalChange, 24(1):1–27.

Papanek, G., 1976. ‘Penduduk Miskin diJakarta’, Prisma, 5(1):59–83.

Prawiroatmojo, S., 1981. BausastaraJawa-Indonesia, Gunung Agung, Jakarta.

Rachbini, D., 1991. ‘Some reflections ondualism in the urban informal economy’,Prisma, 51:46–59.

Saefullah, D., 1994. ‘Mobilitas Pendudukdan Perubahan di Pedesaan’, Prisma,7:35–47.

Said Rusli, 1984. ‘Gerak Penduduk danSirkulasi Tenaga Kerja Pedesaan’, Prisma,1:83–93.

Samuel, H., 1984. Kehidupan MigranSirkuler di Kota, (Studi Kasus TentangUsaha Buruh Bangunan CiluwikMempertahankan Stabilitas Kerjaannyadi Jakarta). BA Thesis, UI, Jakarta.

Senat Mahasiswa Universitas Indonesia,1976. ‘Laporan Hasil Survey ProfilePedagang Kaki Lima di DKI Jaya’,Fakultas Ekonomi, UniversitasIndonesia.

Shri-Ahimusa, P., 1988. Becahiki Kazoku noMonogatari (A story of beca drivers’ families),Keiso-syobo, Tokyo.

Soetrisno, L., 1999. ‘Current social andpolitical conditions of rural Indonesia’,in G. Forrester (ed.), Post-SoehartoIndonesia: renewal of chaos?, IndonesiaAssessment 1998, Crawford HousePublishing, Bathurst: 163–69.

Stark, O., 1991. The Migration of Labor, BasilBlackwell, Cambridge.

Suharso et al., 1976. Rual-urban Migration inIndonesia, LEKNAS-LIPI, Jakarta.

Suharso et al., 1981. Migration and Educationin Jakarta, LEKNAS-LIPI, Jakarta.

Suparman, 1984. ‘Hasil Penelitian Beca danPermasalahannya di Jakarta’, PusatPenelitian Ekonomi dan Masyarakat,Universitas Tarumanagara, Jakarta.

Temple, G., 1974. Migration to Jakarta:empirical search for a theory. PhD Thesis,University of Wisconsin, Madison.

Wahono, F., 1994. ‘Dinamika Ekonomi SosialDesa Sesudah 25 tahun Revolusi Hijau’,Prisma, 3:3–21.

Wheeler, T., and I’Anson, R., 1998. ChasingRickshaws, Lonely Planet Publications.



Winalso, P.A., 1998. ‘Evaluasi Dampak ElNino Khususnya Kejadian 1997 danProspek Dampak untuk MasaMendatang dari Segi Kondisi Cuaca/Iklim Wilayah Indonesia’ in Y. Raharjoet al. (eds), Dampak Krisis Moneter danBencana El Nino Terhadap Masyarakat,Keluarga, Ibu dan Anak di Indonesia, PPTLIPI Jakarta, 1998.

Yayasan Tenaga Kerja Indonesia (YTKI),1987. ‘Becak drivers and scavengers inJakarta’,YTKI, Jakarta (mimeo).

Yusuf and Kurniawan, 1992. ‘Tingkat HidupBuruh dan Tukang Becak: Kaitan keDesa’, Prisma, 1:43–59.

Documents

east asia JourJourJour JourJour Labour and ... · YTKI Yayasan Tenaga Kerja Indonesia ... Botabek (Bogor, Tangerang, and Bekasi) (Media Indonesia, 25 June 1998), but their operations