Utilizing Vulnerability and Risk Indexes for Cultural Heritage in Yogyakarta and Central Java

Dyah Rahmawati Hizbaron(1*), Radikal Lukafiardi(2), Christina Aprilianti(3), Raditya Jati(4)

(1) Department of Environmental Geography, Faculty of Geography, Universitas Gadjah Mada
(2) Department of Environmental Geography, Faculty of Geography, Universitas Gadjah Mada
(3) Department of Environmental Geography, Faculty of Geography, Universitas Gadjah Mada
(4) Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana (National Disaster Management Agency)
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract

Indonesia is home to many cultural heritages which are exposed to natural disaster, its number has grown by 400% within the years of 1975-2010.  In order to protect the cultural heritages, the national government released InaRisk – a web based geospatial data to identify risk information. This application, however, not fully apprises its users of the potential loss that cultural heritage objects, especially temples, may sustain. For these reasons, the research set out to evaluate the potential loss of temples by making use of disaster vulnerability and risk approaches. Seven temples were exposed to earthquake and landslide hazards; hence, observed as the research object on a micro-scale. The research method combined tabular, spatial, and temporal data of several indicators, namely types of building materials, building’s structural integrity after earthquakes and landslides, the number of salvageable objects, building age, significance, historical value, and the number of visitors. The results showed that Prambanan and Sewu Temples had the most substantial amounts of potential losses incurred from damages to at-risk elements, namely the numbers of visitors, employees, and supporting facilities and their distances to sources of hazards. Assessing the numerical values of losses requires further improvements in accuracy as it has not thoroughly factored in the significance of the temples, which is composed of historical value, building age, number of visitors, and other components. Valuation of this significance is still limited to currently available data, including the price of the constituent rocks, area and volume, and supporting facilities.

Keywords

vulnerability, risk, cultural heritage, InaRisk, Yogyakarta

Full Text:

HTML PDF

References

Amri, M. R., Yulianti, G., Yunus, R., Wiguna, S., W. Adi, A., Ichwana, A. N., & Randongkir, Roling Evans Septian, R. T. (2018). RBI (Risiko Bencana Indonesia). In Bnpb Direktorat Pengurangan Risiko Bencana (Vol. 9, Issue 3).

BNPB. (2016). Info bencana. In Info Bencana: Informasi Kebencanaan Bulanan Teraktual.

BPS. (2020). Statistik Indonesia 2020 Statistical Yearbook of Indonesia 2020. Statistical Yearbook of Indonesia, April, 192.

Direktorat Pelestarian Cagar Budaya dan Permuseuman. (2016a). Prambanan. Retrieved from https://cagarbudaya.kemdikbud.go.id/public/objek/detailcb/PO2015071300004/prambanan

Direktorat Pelestarian Cagar Budaya dan Permuseuman. (2016b). Rekap Tahunan Cagar Budaya.

Hizbaron, D. R., Hadmoko, D. S., Mei, E. T. W., Murti, S. H., Laksani, M. R. T., Tiyansyah, A. F., … Tampubolon, I. E. (2018). Towards measurable resilience: Mapping the vulnerability of at-risk community at Kelud Volcano, Indonesia. Applied Geography, 97(June), 212–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2018.06.012

ICCROM; ICOMOS; IUCN; UNESCO World Heritage Centre. (2010). Managing Disaster Risk for World Heritage. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. https://whc.unesco.org/en/managing-disaster-risks/

Iqbal, D. (2018). Mitigasi Bencana, Jangan Lagi Dipandang Sebelah Mata. https://www.mongabay.co.id/2018/10/23/mitigasi-bencana-jangan-lagi-dipandang-sebelah-mata/

Kusuma, W. (2016). Gempa Bumi 2006 Porak-porandakan Kompleks Candi Prambanan. Retrieved from https://regional.kompas.com/read/2016/05/27/08300061/gempa.bumi.2006.porak-porandakan.kompleks.candi.prambanan?page=all

Marrion, C. E. (2016). More effectively addressing fire/disaster challenges to protect our cultural heritage. Journal of Cultural Heritage, 20(Cultural HELP 2014 Special Issue), 746-749.

Marchezini, V., Iwama, A. Y., Pereira, D. C., Conceiçāo, R. S., Trajber, R., & Olivato, D. (2020). Designing a Cultural Heritage Articulated Warning System (CHAWS) strategy to improve disaster risk preparedness in Brazil. Disaster Prevention and Management, 20(DOI 10.1108/DPM-07-2018-0227), 65-85.

National Library of Indonesia. (2014). Temples of Indonesia. https://candi.perpusnas.go.id/temples_en/deskripsi-about_temple

Parisi, F., & Augenti, N. (2013). Earthquake damages to cultural heritage constructions and simplified assessment of artworks. Engineering Failure Analysis, 34, 735-760.

PT. Taman Wisata Candi Borobudur Prambanan Ratu Boko. (2019). Mengenang Peristiwa Gempa Bumi 27 Mei. Retrieved from http://bumn.go.id/borobudur/berita/1-Mengenang-Peristiwa-Gempa-Bumi-27-Mei

Rico, T. (2014). The limits of a heritage at risk framework: the construction of post disaster cultural heritage in Banda Aceh, Indonesia. Journal of Social Archaeology, 14(2), 157-176.

Romāo, X., & Paupério, E. (2019). An Indicator for Post-disaster Economic Loss Valuation of Impacts on Cultural Heritage. International Journal of Architectural Heritage: Conservation, Analysis and Restoration(https://doi.org/10.1080/15583058.2019.1643948), 1-20.

Spennemann, D. H., & Graham, K. (2007). The importance of heritage preservation in natural disaster situations. International Journal Risk Assessment and Management, 7(6/7), 993-1001.

UNISDR. (2009). UNISDR Terminology on Disaster Risk Reduction. https://www.undrr.org/publication/2009-unisdr-terminology-disaster-risk-reduction. Geneva: UNISDR.

Wang, J.-J. (2015). Flood risk maps to cultural heritage: measures and process. Journal of Cultural Heritage, 16, 210-220.

Article Metrics

Abstract view(s): 562 time(s)
HTML: 365 time(s) PDF: 340 time(s)

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.