THE IMPACT OF DYNAMIC LAND-USE AND SPATIAL PLANNING

34 Bhumi, Jurnal Agraria dan Pertanahan Vol. 5 No. 3 (Special Edition), Desember 2019

THE IMPACT OF DYNAMIC LAND-USE AND SPATIAL PLANNING POLICIES ONTHE TRADITIONAL VILLAGE AND ARCHITECTURE IN TOURISM VILLAGES IN

GIANYAR, BALI

I Dewa Gede Agung Diasana PutraFaculty of Engineering, Universitas Udayana

Email: [email protected].

Abstract: Tourism and community participation have transformed the physical setting of the traditional Ba-linese villages in various directions. Tourism village is an important type of spatial planning policies in Bali thatfocus on cultural tourism. In cultural tourism, the traditional villages including cultural and traditional prac-tices of the people are the main resources of tourist activities. Therefore, the traditional village pattern and landuse are signif icant in tourism development. Through integrating participatory rural appraisal (PRA) methodswith land use and architectural-historical investigation, this paper explores and investigates the spatial patternof land use transformation in tourism villages. The results indicate that tourism villages in Gianyar have experi-enced an expansion in both the horizontal and vertical dimensions, with increasing land intensity. This expan-sion was accompanied by the touristif ication process, with land use changing from addressing villagers’ needsto satisfying tourists’ demands. However, this paper states that the transformation is read as a pragmatic re-sponse to address new challenges in the community by interpreting the reconf iguration of the villages andhouses.Keywords: Dynamic land use; spatial planning policies; community participation; transformation; sustainability

BHUMI: Jurnal Agraria dan PertanahanReceived: August 24, 2019; Reviewed: October 16, 2019; Accepted: November 21, 2019.

To cite this article: Putra, IDGA 2019, ‘The impact of dynamic land-use and spatial planning policies on thetraditional village and architecture in tourism villages in Gianyar, Bali’, Bhumi, Jurnal Agraria danPertanahan, volume 5, no. 3 (special edition), hlm. 34-41.

Copyright: ©2019 I Dewa Gede Agung Diasana Putra. All articles published in Jurnal Bhumi are licensed undera Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International license.

A. Introduction

Tourism has transformed the land use of tra-ditional Balinese villages, while tourism village(desa wisata) is a popular tourism developmentthat involves the particitpation of the Balinesecommunities. This kind of tourism developmentis one type of tourist activities that influence spa-tial planning policies in Bali. In tourism activities,community participation has played signif icantroles to make decision in tourism development(Tosun 2000; Li 2004; Li 2005; Chok & Macbeth2007; Zhao & Ritchie 2007; Prabhakarana, Nair &Ramachandran 2014). The main fundamental

philosophy for community based on tourism de-velopment is the contribution of local people.Local communities have to contribute to plan thetourism activities but also to actively run andmanage tourist activities. In this model, localpeople’s livelihood becomes signif icant factors todevelop tourist activities (Chok & Macbeth 2007).In this way, tourism will produce enhanced op-portunities for local people to gain more benef itsfrom tourism (Tosun 2006). This communityparticipation will lead a positive attitude for theconservation of the local environment (Inskeep1994) as well as local identity and culture (Putra,

DOI: 10.31292/jb.v5i3.388

35I Dewa Gede Agung Diasana Putra, The impact of dynamic land-use and spatial ... 34-41

Lozanovska & Fuller 2013).However, community participation in tourism

development also causes negative impacts to thelocal nature and culture. The degradation andcommercialization of culture are the examples ofthe negative impacts. The community sometimestry to sell their culture so that the activities willfade the sanctity of the culture and religious ac-tivities in which there is profanation of sacredperformances and places (Bugnicourt 1977;Hanna 1972). Tourism has also stimulated envi-ronment alteration threating sustainability of theBalinese environment (Cohen 1978). Agriculturalsites have transformed into built environment’sfunctions. Besides, the construction of touristfacilities have created massive energy and waterconsumption and produced a massive volume ofwaste (Lindayati & Nelson 1995).

This phenomenon gives raises to the questionabout community participation and the impactto the land use and spatial planning policies inGianyar, Bali. In order to investigate this phenom-enon, the integrating participatory rural appraisal(PRA) methods, land use and architectural-ehistorical investigation have been carried out inUbud, a traditional Balinese village in Gianyar. Thismethod was used to explore the spatial–temporalpattern of land use transformation in tourism vil-lage. Land intensity, tourism expansion and landuse changing in Ubud, the most popular touristdestination in Gianyar, were investigated and ex-plored. This paper then argues that the unsus-tainability of land use patterns presented fromthe conflict between increasing use of land fortourism and limitation of agricultural land, ap-propriation of the traditional spaces and the fad-ing of eco-environment resulting in the loss ofsome traditional elements.

Based on this argument, the changes of village’ssetting was scrutinized and presented. Initially,some theoretical considerations of communityparticipation and the development of tourism vil-lages are discussed. The methodology and detailsof the examination are then described. This is fol-lowed by a detailed explanation of the compo-nents of the traditional Balinese villages and par-

ticipation rural appraisal. Finally, how the com-munity participation will impact the dynamic landuse and planning policies in tourism developmentare discussed and concluded.

This paper investigates how the Balinese ac-commodates new activities for tourism in theirtraditional houses and villages. Physical transfor-mations of the houses and villages in Ubud weredocumented and inspected through visual docu-mentation and examination. Visual examinationis not merely supplementary process; rather theexamination was a way to scrutinize the architec-tural challenge. By presenting graphic analysis,the transformation of the physical pattern of thehouses and villages were scrutinized and explored.

The interviews with home owners and the headof the traditional villages were carried out to re-construct the houses’ and villages’ historical pat-tern. In these deep interviews, the transformationof the houses and villages as well as the motiva-tion and inspiration of the people in the processof the transformation were also contextualised.These approaches were also to reconstruct thephysical change processes in which the processeswere then transferred to become architectural il-lustrations for spatial investigation.

C. The traditional Balinese villages andParticipation Rural Appraisal

The traditional Balinese village: the autonomyterritory of Bali

A village in Bali called desa pekraman is anindependent territory occupied by a traditionalgroup based on traditional ties. In this desapekraman, the people are bonded by the respon-sibility to maintain and perform social-culturaland ceremonies, based on Hindu Philosophy(Pitana 1994, 139). In the Balinese history, thereare two main types of villages, namely the BaliAga village, which mostly lay in the highlandzones, and the Bali Dataran village, which is in-fluenced by the Majapahit culture (Parimin 1986).The second type becomes the majority of the vil-lages in Bali including the villages in Ubud. Fur-thermore, Pitana (1994, 145) stated that desapekraman is characterized by: (1) a territory that


is usually bounded by natural borders such asrivers, forests, ravines or valleys, hills or beaches;(2) members who have many responsibilities andrequirements; (3) temples where the people per-form ceremonies such as Desa or Bale Agung,Puseh and Dalem Temples; (4) autonomy to man-age the village; and (5) a custom organization tomanage the village.

Since a village has autonomy to manage itsterritory independently, there are some variationsof socio-cultural activities and village patterns.Several factors generally influence the pattern ofvillages. The ritual value system that places thesacred zone in the kangin (east) where the sunrises is a signif icant factor that influences thepattern. Another factor is the geographical con-dition in which the sacred value is the directionof the mountain and the profane value is the di-rection of the sea. The next factor is economicfactor. The economic resources in the village willinfluence the pattern of the village such as f ish-ing villages facing the sea and farming villagesfacing rice f ields or plantations (Gelebet 1985, 12).

As mentioned above, there are two types ofBalinese village pattern: the Bali Aga village andBali Dataran village. The main characteristic ofthe f irst is that the village has a main communalstreet relating kaja (toward the mountain) andkelod (toward the sea) (Parimin 1986). On theother hand, a Bali Dataran village is divided intotwo main axes namely: kaja-kelod and kangin-kauh(east-west). Some village facilities, such as temples,wantilan (the meeting pavilion) and a market, arelocated in the crossroad called catus pata.

Despite the variations, the villages has similarconcept related to the tri hita karana philosophy.Based on this philosophy, physically, the village isdivided into parahyangan, pawongan and pale-mahan (Alit 1997). Parahyangan is an area desig-nated for sacred buildings (temples). Pawonganis a place for dwellings; and palemahan is an un-inhabited area such as rice f ields, orchards, farmsand cemetery. Whereas, palemahan is an area ofnatural boundaries of the villages.

Since the socio-cultural activities are per-formed in the village facilities, the village becomes

a stage of socio-cultural practices. Temples andmany village facilities are places to perform manyceremonial activities. The traditional practicesinvolve not only villagers but also visitors. Theperformances found in almost every village be-come a cultural performance to attract tourists.The increasing number of tourists visiting the vil-lages and the potential economic benefit from ithave encouraged the community to participatein tourist activities and involve to build touristfacilities in their houses and many parts of thevillages. Consequently, the participation will in-fluence the transformation of the villages’ pattern.

Participation Rural Appraisal (PRA)

Participation Rural Appraisal (PRA) has beenpracticed for a long time in Indonesia. However,it is not yet unfamiliar. PRA is an approach toformulate planning and policy in rural areas thateffectively involve the participation of the com-munity (Chambers in Moeliono & Rianingsih1996). Practically, the key element of PRA is aholistic method that focuses on the effective re-lationship and interaction between different ele-ments of a community involving the relationshipbetween people and environment (Binns, Hill &Nel 1997). In this approach, the success of thedevelopment is characterized by the active involve-ment of the people in the program planning pro-cess, implementation and supervision. The aimof this approach is to achieve sustainability andeff iciency of the program. It allows communitiesin a village to improve and analyze as well as sharethe condition, potentials and problems of theirvillage and then produce plans and perform ac-tions in a participatory manner (Sia & Ling 2011;Chambers 1992)

The objectives of the application of PRA are toprovide effective supports in planning and imple-ment many development programs in a village.This approach tries to encourage the communityempowerment in a sustainable manner, environ-mental perspective and local contexts. In the con-text of the village law, the PRA can provide un-derstanding to the village government in the pro-cess of identifying the potentials and problems


in their villages.Basic Principles of PRA that are stated by

Rochdyanto (2000) are:1. Learning from each other and sharing ex-

periences;2. Involving all group members;3. Outsiders as facilitators;4. Applying the concept of triangulation (mul-

tidisciplinary PRA team, variation of tech-niques and diversity of sources); and

5. Practicing the orientation and program ofsustainability.

D. The Participation and The TourismDevelopment in Gianyar

Community participation has already influ-enced the tourism development in a tourism vil-lage. However, the community participation thathas not applied the appropriate method will af-fect the tourism development. In Gianyar, espe-cially in Ubud, people actively participate in tour-ism development through running any kinds of

business in their houses and lands. They builttourist facilities through the process of learningand sharing experience among the people ofUbud. They also discuss and learn from othertourism components such as travel agents, tour-ism practices or the tourists who visited Ubud.From this participation process, the people are ableto make various tourism plan for their individualhouses or lands.

The participation has led the transformationof the village pattern and the family-house com-ponents (Sukawati 2004). This can be seen in thetransformation of the traditional Balinese houseand some tourism villages. Ubud, the most popu-lar district with tourism village in Gianyar, is oneexample of tourism village with high communityparticipation. Many people of Ubud have beeninvolved in tourist activities through running vari-ous kinds of tourism facilities such as laundry,restaurant, homestay, art shop, selling perfor-mance tickets, providing driver service and thelikes.

Figure 1. The precinct of the traditional house in Ubud.


The community participation has alreadychanged the landscape of the village traditionalpattern. The village that traditionally was a pre-cinct of traditional house while the economic ac-tivities were centred in the main cross road (catuspatha) of the village (Figure 1), business activitiesnow inf iltrate into the settlement area and thetraditional houses. This phenomenon can be seenfrom the visual examination along the main streetof the village. From 213 traditional houses in Ubud,129 houses were transformed for tourist activitiesin 2013 (Putra, Lozanovska & Fuller 2013) and 139houses have been transformed for tourism facili-ties based on fieldworks in 2019. The data presentthat the participation of the people has encouragedthe transformation of the village and the house.

The attachment of tourist facilities in the vil-lage was accompanied by the touristif ication pro-cess of the land-use change, from accommodat-ing the demand of villagers to satisfying the needof visitors. In responding to tourist activities,people in Ubud have built tourist facilities in theirtraditional houses. Com-mercial activities have be-come an additional functionof the house so that thehouses have then accommo-dated not only domestic andsocio-cultural but also com-mercial activities. On aver-age, the f loor areas of thecommercial zone of the tra-ditional dwellings in Ubudwere 42% of the total floorarea (Figure 2). This f igureshows that, overall, touristproperties are still smallerthan the main function of ahouse. The people of Ubudstill use their houses for do-mestic and ceremonial activi-ties. Some people in Ubudbuilt more spaces for commercial activities in which4 out of 16 houses have more than 50% commercialarea. In one house, the commercial area (68%) is astwice the residential area (32%).

Figure 2. Comparison of ground floor area betweenresidential and commercial purposes (%)

The transformations, presented in the photo-graphic views of traditional houses in selectedspots, have already changed the landscape of thevillage (Figure 3). Some traditional walls havebeen changed to be kiosks or art shops (Figure4). Some traditional gates have been demolishedand some others have been transformed intomodern style (Figure 5).


The f igures above present that the front im-age of the houses and villages have already gotsignif icant influence since the community par-ticipation is high in number. This transformationhas changed the visual identity of the house andthe village. Even though the house is hidden be-hind the tourist facilities, the traditional gate thatstill exists in almost 77% traditional houses func-tions to identify the house as a traditional Balinesecompound (Putra, Lozanovska & Fuller 2013).

From the gates, people are easily able to recog-nize the existence of a traditional house amongthe tourist facilities. Without the traditional gate,the existence of the houses is hard to recognize.Even though the Balinese have attempted to main-tain their culture and traditional identity throughkeeping the traditional gate, tourism villages haveconverted from a traditional village to a moderntown.

This transformation of the village is one of thenegative impacts of tourism in which the tradi-tional village that are the main resources to at-tract tourists tends to fade. This process will in-fluence the sustainability of the tourism develop-ment in Ubud as the most popular tourist desti-nation. This negative impact occurs since the keybasic principles of PRA were never applied. Asstated by Rochdyanto (2000), the application ofthe triangulation concept that involves other tour-ism stakeholders and practicing or sharing relatedto sustainability are signif icant. The absence ofthese basic principles make the progress of tour-ism development is on the inappropriate path. Theplanning and implementation progress of tour-ism facilities has been without coordinationamong individual practices and between thepeople and the local government. Every compo-nent works individually so that there are no ho-listic and integrated programs among the stake-holders.

The unsustainability of land-use patterns pre-sented from the conflict between the increase oftourism land use and limitation of agriculturalland is an appropriation of the traditional spaces

and the fading of eco-environment, resulting inthe loss of some traditional elements. This can beseen from the existence of the backyard of thehouses. A backyard is traditionally an open spaceto supply materials for domestic and ceremonialactivities. The place is also a space for processinggarbage, and sometimes for defecation. In thisspace, the people prepare ceremonial activities,plant vegetation or raise animals. This area is nowtransformed into buildings since the family sizeincreases and is also used to run tourism busi-ness. In Ubud, the backyards are mostly trans-formed in which 60% of the houses has insuff i-cient spaces for planting trees or raising animals.Inevitably, this transformation has eliminated thetraditional functions of the backyard as an eco-environmental space in a house.

The transformation of land use can be bestdescribed as an on-going transformation. Theland use is adjusted to meet the current demandsof the people. The Bali policy to encourage somevillages to be tourism villages since tourism ac-tivities have offered economic benef it not onlyfor the people, but also for the government havecaused the transformation of land use in a tradi-tional village (MacRae 1997). This policy presentsthat power relations have been a part of politicaland cultural history. The land-use change in thetourism villages can be seen as a pragmatic re-sponse of the people to accommodate new chal-lenges in the community by interpreting thereconfiguration of the houses and villages

E. Conclusions

In tourism development, community partici-pation has a signif icant role to color the successof the development. The participatory rural ap-praisal (PRA) method is a method that applies invarious kinds of development including tourismdevelopment. However, the participation of thecommunity in Ubud did not apply all elementsof PRA especially collaboration between andamong the stakeholders. The absence of the keycomponents has caused land-use change, both


in addressing villagers’ needs and satisfying tour-ists’ demands. Even though every stakeholder hastried to protect their culture, of traditional iden-tity and other resources to attract tourists, Ubudhas transformed from a traditional village to amodern town. This condition shows an unsus-tainability of land-use patterns as can be seenfrom the conflict between increasing tourismland-use and limitation of agricultural land,appropriation of the traditional spaces and thefading of eco-environmental space. This appro-priation can be best described as an on-going re-newal where the land use is adjusted to best suitcurrent needs. This on-going renewal representspower relations as part of political and culturalhistory that can be read as a pragmatic responseto meet new challenges in the community.

References

Alit, I K et al. 1997, Arsitektur Masyarakat Balidalam Berbhuana, Tim Pameran ArsitekturTradisional Bali dalam rangka Pesta KesenianBali 1997, Denpasar.

Binns, T, Hill, T and Nel E 1997, ‘Learning fromthe people: Participatory rural appraisal, ge-ography and rural development in the ‘new’South Africa’, Applied Geography, vol. 17, no.I, pp I-7,

Bugnicourt, J 1977, ‘Tourism with no return’, TheBridge, vol. 2 no. 4, pp. 19-20.

Chambers, R 1992, ‘Participatory rural appraisals;past, present and future’, Forests, Trees andPeople, Newsletter no 15/16, pp 4-9

Chok, S & Macbeth, J 2007, ‘Tourism as a tool forpoverty alleviation: a critical analysis of ‘pro-poor tourism’ and implications for sustainabi-lity’, Current Issues in Tourism, 10 (2&3), pp.144-164

Cohen, E 1978, ‘The impact of tourism on thephysical environment’, Annals of TourismResearch, vol. 5 (2) , pp. 215-237.

Gelebet, IN et al. 1985, Arsitektur Tradisional Bali,Departemen Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan,Proyek Inventarisasi dan Dokumentasi Ke-budayaan Daerah, Denpasar.

Hanna, WA 1972, ‘Bali in the seventies, part I: cul-tural tourism’, American Universities FieldStaff Reports, Southeast Asia Series, Vol. 20,no. 2, pp. 1-7.

Inskeep, E 1994, National and regional tourismplanning: methodologies and case studies,Routledge, London and New York.

Li, W 2005, ‘Community decision-making: par-ticipation in development’, Annals of Tour-ism Research, 33 (1), pp. 132-143.

Li, Y 2004, ‘Exploring community tourism inChina: the case of Nanshan tourism zone’,Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 12 (3), pp. 175-193.

Lindayati, R & Nelson, G 1995, ‘Land use changein Bali: a study of tourism development inKelurahan Sanur’, in B Mitchell (ed), BaliBalancing Environment, Economy and Cul-ture, Department of Geography Universityof Waterloo, pp. 441-432.

MacRae, GS 1997, ‘Economic, ritual and historyin Balinese tourist town’, PhD thesis, Univer-sity of Auckland.

Moeliono & Rianingsih D 1996, Kebijakan danstrategi penerapan PRA dalam pengem-bangan program, Driya Media, Bandung.

Parimin, AP 1986, ‘Fundamental study on spatialformation of island village: environmentalhierarchy of sacred-profane concept in Bali’,PhD dissertation, University of Osaka, Osaka.

Pitana, IG (ed.) 1994, ‘Dinamika Masyarakat danKebudayaan Bali’, Bali Post, Denpasar.

Prabhakarana, S, Nair, V, Ramachandranb, S 2014,‘Community participation in rural tourism:towards a conceptual framework’, 5th AsiaEuro Conference 2014, Procedia – Social andBehavioral Sciences, 144, pp. 290–295.

Putra, IDGAD, Lozanovska, M & Fuller, R 2013,‘The transformation of the traditional Ba-linese house for tourist facilities: managinga home-based enterprise and maintaining anarchitectural identity’, Journal of Asia Pacif icManagement and Business Application, 2(2),pp. 53-67.

Rochdyanto, S 2000, ‘Langkah-langkah pelaksa-naan metode PRA’, article in ToT PKPI,


Yogyakarta.Sia, R & Ling, J 2011, ‘The PRA tools for qualitative

rural tourism research’, 2011 Tourism andServices Engineering Management Seminar,Systems Engineering Procedia 1, pp.392–398

Tosun, C 2000, ‘Limits to community participa-tion in the tourism development process indeveloping countries’, Tourism Management,vol. 21, pp. 613-633

Tosun, C 2006, ‘Expected nature of communityparticipation in tourism development’, Tour-ism Management, 27 (3), pp. 493-504

Zhao, W & Ritchie JR 2007, ‘Tourism and povertyalleviation: an integrative research frame-work’, Current Issues in Tourism, 10 (2&3),pp. 119- 143

Documents

THE IMPACT OF DYNAMIC LAND-USE AND SPATIAL PLANNING