VULNERABILITY OF URBAN INFORMAL SECTOR: STREET VENDORS IN YOGYAKARTA, INDONESIA (Summary)
VULNERABILITY OF
URBAN INFORMAL SECTOR: STREET VENDORS IN YOGYAKARTA, INDONESIA
Author(s) : Aloysius Gunadi BRATA
Source :
Theoretical and Empirical Researches in Urban Management, Vol. 5, No. 5 (14)
(February 2010), pp. 47-58
Published by : Research Center in Public Administration
and Public Services
VULNERABILITY OF URBAN INFORMAL SECTOR: STREET VENDORS
IN YOGYAKARTA, INDONESIA
Aloysius Gunadi BRATA
Faculty of Economics, Atma Jaya Yogyakarta University
Jl. Babarsari No. 43, Yogyakarta, Indonesia
Indonesia is one of the countries with large informal
activities. According to Blunch et. al. (2001), informal sector in Indonesia
absorbs 77.9 percent of non-agricultural employment; meanwhile, in other Asian
countries, contribution of this sector to employment ranges between 73.7
percent in India, 67.1 percent (Pakistan), 66.9 percent (Philipines), and 51.4
percent (Thailand). The role of this sector is more important when the economic crisis hit
Indonesia since 1997 in which the ability of modern-formal sector to absorb
employments decreased. A large number of employees lost their jobs because of numerous
downsizing in manufacturing industries and construction sectors. In this
situation, informal sector is a solution for unemployment problems. Hence,
economic crisis also has reversed formalization of the economy as shown by a
decrease in the share of employees in formal sector (Suryahadi et. al., 2003).
According to the Indonesian Central Bureau of Statistics, the number of
informal employees in 1998-2006 were more than 57 millions or about more than
60 percent of productive work force. By definition, informal employees in
Indonesia refer to own-account workers, self-employed assisted by family
members, and non-wage family workers.
Informal sectors are
also an important activity in the daily life of urban people since most of
labor force depends on the informal sector as their main source of employment
and income. One of the important informal activities in urban areas is street
vending (pedagang kaki lima). As street based traders, they use space in the
streets that are originally not intended for trading activities and it is also
considered illegal This illegality status makes the street vendors face
harassment and threat from policy and other government authorities (Suharto,
2003). Suharto showed that municipality government in Bandung often use
'clearance' operations to remove the traders from the busiest areas of the
city.
Local government in Yogyakarta and Sleman (both are in Yogyakarta
Special Region) also tend to adopt relocation policy rather than rearrange the
use of public space as expected by the street vendors (Brata, 2006). However, it should be mentioned that their vulnerability does not only
relate to local government policies but also to other aspects.
According to Dercon
(2005), the term 'vulnerability' actually has been used in a variety of related
but different meanings in several studies that in general related to "a
sense of insecurity, of potential harm people must feel wary of - something bad
may happen and spell ruin". In developing countries, vulnerability is a
concept that is closely related to poverty issues since the poor faces risks in
their daily lives. Although vulnerable is not similar to poor, however the poor
is the most vulnerable group when they are hit by external factors such as
economic downturn in Indonesia (Suryahadi and Sumarto, 2001). Moreover, Dercon
(2005) suggests that risk is not just another expression or dimension of
poverty, but it is also an important cause of persistent poverty and poverty traps.
One of the important
informal economic activities of the urban poor is street vending that is also vulnerable
in nature. Among other informal workers in urban areas, the street vendor in
general is the poorest and economically vulnerable (~argoklu and Eder, 2006)
and remains uncomfortably vulnerable not only as individual-economic agents but
also as people (Dabir-Alai, 2004). Other aspects of vendors' vulnerability
besides insufficient institutional arrangements for vendors are such as having
to provide and care for dependants, working long hours and coping with the
debilitating consequences of their material poverty, or in their relation with their
suppliers or creditors.
Dabir-Alai (2004)
filled the literature gap on the empirical measure of vulnerability of street
vendors. In his study on street vendors in Delhi, India, he predicted the rate
of vendors' vulnerability by employing a composite index as a new vulnerability
measure. There are two groups of vulnerability elements used in this index. The
first group is elements in which vendors have control on such as working hours,
and the second one is elements in which vendors have no control on such as
dependants. From his study, Dabir-Alai found that bullying is the most
vulnerability element of vendors, it counts for about 73 percent of respondents.
Meanwhile only one percent of vendors has relation with suppliers or creditors,
which also indicate that most of street vendors use self financing method for
their business.
A CASE OF STREET VENDOR IN
YOGYAKARTA
The data for this study
were collected through a field survey conducted in Yogyakarta urban region that
covered Yogyakarta city and urban areas of Sleman district. In Sleman, members
of the Association of Street Vendors in Sleman (or Paguyuban Pedagang Kaki Lima
Sleman PPKLS) are about 3.500 vendors (Kurniawan, 2008). There are regulations
on street vendors in both city and district. According to Peraturan Daerah (or
"Local Regulation") No. 22/2002 of the City of Yogyakarta, street
vendor is a seller for goods and services that operate individually in economic
areas that occupies space on public street or facility, operates temporarily or
not permanently and uses movable and unmovable equipments. In the Peraturan
Daerah No. 11/2004 of Sleman District, street vendor refers to a business actor
who operates the business temporarily in a certain period of time occupying the
street or public facility, using moveable and installable trade equipment.
The survey was
conducted in February 2007 by an enumerator who interviewed 122 street vendors.
Locations for survey were spread across the town as well as time (day and/or
night) and type of products. There were several main streets in the region
surveyed and they were grouped into eight areas (JI Magelang, Kwarasan-Pingit,
JI Mangkubumi, JI Kaliurang, JI Solo-Langen Sari, JI Colombo-Sagan-Gejayan, JI
Kusumanegara-JantiGedong Kuning, and JI. Babarsari-Kledokan-Seturan). These
areas did not reflect administrative boundaries of city and district. Types of
products covered in the survey were not only food vendors (such as fruit, snack
foods, and drinking water) but also non-food (such as newspapers, cigarette and
cellular prepaid voucher) and services providers (such as shoes repair and tire
repair). Number of respondents of each group is 57, 46 and 19 respectively.
Main Results
Statistics Description of
Respondents
Variable
|
Statistics
|
Aqe of the
respondents (mean)
|
40
|
Years of age of business (mean)
|
10
|
Male (percent)
|
77
|
Female (percent)
|
23
|
Day activity
(percent)
|
65
|
Night activity
(percent)
|
7
|
Day and niqht
activity (percent)
|
29
|
Migrant (Region
of origin is not Yogyakarta Special Province) (percent)
|
29
|
Other interesting
finding that is contrary to the street vendors in Delhi (Dabir-Alai, 2004) is
most of the samples responded that they never experienced bullying case
although it should be mentioned that almost all of the bullying cases were done
by the local government officials. Perhaps, it indicates that in general,
Yogyakarta is quite friendly for street vendors although their activities are
not officially needed. Why Yogyakarta more friendly than other cities in
Indonesia? Possibly it is related to the characteristics of Yogyakarta that
prevent the government officials to use violence in implementing their
policies. This city is the center of Javanese culture and also known as the
Education City (Kota Pendidikan) in Indonesia. Other possible explanation is
the role of non-government organizations (NGOs) such as the UPLINK-Indonesia
that provide advocacies for the vendors in facing the government officials
(Brata, 2006). There was also a story about vendors that 'manipulate' their
relations with local politicians to increase their bargaining position in
facing the government officials (Brata, 2006). This manipulation is a strategic
effort especially during the political events such as the general election
(Pemilihan Umum). All of these factors may protect the street vendors from
bullying practices.
Based on the value of
vulnerability index, this study found that most of vendors experience vulnerability
at the medium level (Table 6, column AGB's version) that consist of five ranks
(rank 5th to rank 8th). These five ranks entail about 89 percent of the entire
respondents. There is no respondent in the fist rank of vulnerability. There
are 0.8 percent of respondents in the rank 2nd and 3rd. Therefore, there are only
1.6 percent of street vendors that experience high vulnerability in their
vending activity. Meanwhile, in the Dabir-Alai's version, more than a half of
respondents are in the vulnerable rank of vulnerability that quite equal to
rank 7th and 8th of the AGB's version. There is no vendor experience acutely vulnerable.
Distributions of
Respondents Based on Ranks of Vulnerability Index
These findings indicate
that different elements used in the vulnerability index may produce different picture
of the vulnerability of street vendors. As already mentioned in the previous
section, a rich picture of vulnerability is related to the number of elements
used in constructing the index. However, it also depends on the data
availability of vulnerability elements.
More detail picture of
vendor's vulnerability based on type of products and locations is shown in the next
table. This table indicates that food vendors are more vulnerable than non-food
vendor or street vendors who provide services. The means of index for food
vendors are 4.9 compared to 4.7 (non-food) and 4.3 (services). Based on the
locations of daily business activity, street vendors on JI. Magelang experience
the highest vulnerability among other locations. Mean of vulnerability index of
this location is 5.3. Meanwhile, location with the lowest vulnerability among
the samples is JI. Kaliurang (4.3). By combining locations and type of
products, the highest index is found at vendors who provide services at Sagan-JI.
Colombo-JI. Gejayan (6). However, since there is only one sample in this
subgroup, then the non-food sellers on JI. Magelang is more reasonable to be
the highest vulnerable subgroup among other locations and products. It is also
consistent with the fact that it is the location with the highest mean of vulnerability
index. These findings indicate that a difference in type of products or
locations of vending may results a different in the vulnerability level of
street vendors.
Mean and Standard Deviation of
Vulnerabity Index Based on Product and Location
This paper focuses on vulnerability index of street
vendor. The index is developed based on a method applied on street vendors in
Delhi, India (Dabir-Alai, 2004). Yogyakarta region in Java is chosen as a case
of empirical research in Indonesia. Based on the value of vulnerability index,
this study found that most of vendors experience vulnerability at the medium
level of the AGB's version of vulnerability. There are about 89 percent of the
entire respondents in the five ranks (rank 5th to rank 8th) of the AGB's index.
In contrast, there are less than 2 percent of street vendors that experience
high vulnerability in their vending activity.
More detail picture of
vendor's vulnerability is also provided based on type of products and
locations. The study found that food vendors are more vulnerable than non-food
vendor or street vendors who provide services. Meanwhile, based on the
locations of daily business activity, street vendors on JI. Magelang experience
the highest vulnerability among other locations. By combining locations and
type of products, the highest index is found at vendors who provide services at
Sagan-JI. Colombo-JI. Gejayan. These findings indicate that a difference in
type of products or locations of vending may results a different in the
vulnerability level of street vendors. Furthermore, other limitation of the
study may relate to the construction method of the vulnerability index. As
already mentioned, selected elements of vulnerability are based on the
subjective view. Certainly, this approach may reduce the reliability of
elements used in the index. In addition to this note, measuring vulnerability
level based on street vendor's point of view is also interesting to be applied.
Backlink:
https://www.jstor.org
https://journal.uny.ac.id
http://uny.ac.id
Backlink:
https://www.jstor.org
https://journal.uny.ac.id
http://uny.ac.id
Comments
Post a Comment