【摘要】 洪涝、干旱及水体污染等迫切问题暴露了印度尼西亚雅加达市的治理危机。尽管洪涝问题已经上升到政治层面,当地政府也正在推动河岸景观的改善,但雅加达的公共政策仍未厘清供水不足与洪涝问题之间的复杂联系。早在1872年,雅加达的洪涝问题就已非常显著。随后出现了多次重大洪涝灾害,最近一次发生于2015年。当地政府制定了多项政策来解决这一难题,新近提出的"河流正常化"政策即为其中一项。其旨在提高河流泄洪能力,避免暴雨期间河水泛滥,具体措施包括取缔河岸地区的非正规居住点、拓宽河道和运河宽度及疏浚河床。但不少学者对这项政策持批判态度,技术官僚性过强是弊病之一,以开发流域基础设施为名借机引资为其二。此外,该政策也未顾及非正规居住点居民的利益,难以促进建立兼具包容性与韧性的社会-水文系统。本研究借助系统动力学模型,针对雅加达的洪涝问题,剖析了社会和水文-地貌因素间的相互作用,对当前用以改善洪涝问题、预防潜在风险的"河流正常化"政策进行了评估,并进一步对两类不同的洪水治理政策——提升疏浚成效和综合水景政策进行了检验和对比,结果表明:尽管前者可在短期之内实现较高的效益且实施难度较小,后者却能够更加系统地应对雅加达的洪涝问题以及未来的气候风险,为城市带来更加持久的韧性。但综合水景政策在实施过程中既需要以多中心治理制度为保障,也需要依靠边界组织来推动不同治理层面各行为主体的积极参与。更多还原

【Abstract】 Governance deficit in Jakarta, Indonesia is often associated to its pressing issues of too much,too little, and too dirty water. Although flood has become an important political issue and the government is pushing a landscape change in the riverbank areas, the public policy in Jakarta has yet to comprehend the complex linkages between the gap in water provisioning and flooding.Flood is one major issue that has affected Jakarta since as early as 1872. Subsequently,major flood events occurred with the most recent being in 2015. To solve this problem,the government has implemented several policies, with the most recent one named as"Normalisasi." This policy focuses on increasing the flow capacity of the river to prevent it from overflowing during heavy rain events. Under this policy, the government claims eviction of informal settlements from the riverbank areas;widening rivers and canals; and dredging the river beds. Many scholars have criticized the overly technocratic framing of this policy, its covert agenda for attracting investments in infrastructure development in catchment areas, lack of empathy towards informal settlers, along with lack of vision for an inclusive and resilient socio-hydrological system.This study uses system dynamics modeling to illustrate the interplay of social and hydrogeomorphological factors leading to Jakarta’s vulnerability to flooding and to evaluate the policy response of Normalisasi against this vulnerability and future risk scenarios. The model is further used to test and compare two categories of policy strategies of increasing dredging efficacy and an integrated waterscape policy. Though the former seemed cost-efficient in short term and less complex in terms of governance, the latter will help in long-term resilience as it considers the Jakarta flooding issue more holistically with future climate risks. However, implementation of such an integrated waterscape policy requires the institutionalization of polycentric governance and also needs a boundary organization to increase participation of diverse actors across governance levels.更多还原