Articles

Achievement of ODF (Open Defecation Free) Villages Through the Social Functions Approach In Teba Village

Authors

  1. 1Lampung University 🇮🇩
  2. 2FISIP, Universitas Lampung, Indonesia. 🇮🇩
  3. 3FISIP, Universitas Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa, Indonesia. 🇮🇩
Received
December 12, 2022
Revised
June 25, 2023
Accepted
June 26, 2023
Published
June 30, 2023
https://doi.org/10.25077/jantro.v25.n1.p21-33.2023

Abstract

Public behavior of open defecation free (ODF) is an unhealthy condition. The program through ownership of healthy latrines is presented as a means of educating the public about healthy living. The research aims to determine the social structures in achieving ODF (Open Defecation Free) villages. This study uses qualitative methods with the aim of seeing the location first hand and conducting interviews for the individuals and groups involved. The results of the study show that the ODF program involves several components including the company, government and community. The function of the community is to form groups for sanitation socialization, while the company participates in building both latrines and clean water facilities. Meanwhile, Pekon Teba also provides facilities, in accordance with government programs that have been planned, both in terms of budget and additional facilities. The facilities and infrastructure provided to the community include repairing waterways by establishing a Clean Water Facilities Management Agency (BPSAB) together with YKWS and PT. Tirta Investama while from a budget perspective it is fully supported by CSR PT. Tirta Investama and policies in the form of sanctions limit access to public services for residents who are reluctant or refuse to build healthy latrines in their respective homes.

Keywords

Social Function; Achievement; Sanitation; ODF

References

  1. Akmal, Z. (2021). Eksistensi Masyarakat Adat Dalam Undang-Undang Terkait Lingkungan Hidup. Jurnal Industri dan Perkotaan, XVII(1), 27–35.
  2. Apriando, T. (2019). Apa Kabar Penanganan Kasus Pembakaran Tenda Petani Kendeng? Mongabay. https://www.mongabay.co.id/2019/02/16/apa-kabar-penanganan-kasus-pembakaran-tenda-petani-kendeng/
  3. Asriwijaya, E. (2020). Gerakan Ekopopulisme Komunitas Samin Melawan Perusahaan Semen di Pegunungan Kendeng. Jurnal Sosiologi Pendidikan Humanis, 5(1), 35–47.
  4. BBC Indonesia. (2016). Tolak pembangunan pabrik semen, sembilan perempuan cor kaki. BBC Indonesia. https://www.bbc.com/indonesia/berita_indonesia/2016/04/160413_indonesia_protes_semen_istana
  5. Gandhawangi, S. (2022). Ajaran Komunitas Samin Masih Relevan hingga Kini. Kompas.id.
  6. Haba, J. (2010). Realitas Masyarakat Adat di Indonesia: Sebuah Refleksi. PMB-LIPI, 12(2), 255–276.
  7. Harnanto, R. A., Ummah, A. I., Rekavianti, E., & Ratnasari, A. (2018). Gerakan Masyarakat Kendeng, Rembang untuk Keadilan dan Penegakan Hak Asasi Manusia. JSW (Jurnal Sosiologi Walisongo), 2(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.21580/jsw.2018.2.1.2270
  8. Komnas Perempuan. (2019). Isu HAM Perempuan dalam Konflik Pertambangan: Rencana/Pembangunan Pabrik Semen di Pengunungan Kendeng Jawa Tengah.
  9. Kresna, M. (2017). Gubernur Ganjar Lagi-Lagi Terbitkan Izin Baru Semen Rembang. Tirto.id.
  10. Matanasi, P. (2017). Cara Samin Melawan dan Membikin Resah Belanda. Tirto.id. https://tirto.id/cara-samin-melawan-dan-membikin-resah-belanda-clqN
  11. Mies, M. (1994). The Need for a New Vision: the Subsistence Perspective. In Ecofeminism (hal. 297–321). Zed Books.
  12. Mies, M. (2014a). Feminist Research: Science, Violence and Responsility. In Ecofeminism (hal. 36). Zed Books.
  13. Mies, M. (2014b). Liberating the Consumer. In Ecofeminism (hal. 251–263). Zed Books.
  14. Mutmainnah & Demadevina, N. (2020). Outlook HuMa: Sikap Pemerintah dan DPR dalam Legislasi Nasional Terkait Hak Masyarakat Adat di Tahun 2020. Jakarta: Perkumpulan Huma Infonesia
  15. Pembaharua Agraria dan Pengelolaan Sumberdaya Alam, (2001).
  16. Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 41 Tahun 1999 Tentang Kehutanan, Peraturan Pemerintah Republik Indonesia 1 (1999).
  17. Nugraha, I. (2018). Bercermin dari Kasus Kendeng, Sulitnya Warga Peroleh Keadilan Lingkungan. Mangobay. https://www.mongabay.co.id/2018/02/16/bercermin-dari-kasus-kendeng-sulitnya-warga-peroleh-keadilan-lingkungan/
  18. Ramadayanti, E. (2021). Upaya Perlindungan Hak Masyarakat Adat setelah Satu Dasawarsa Program MIFEE(Merauke Integrated Food and Energy Estate)Melalui Citizen Law Suit. Padjadjaran Law Review, 9(1), 1–20.
  19. Rosidi. (2017). Berebut berkah dari pegunungan Kendeng. Lokadata. https://lokadata.id/artikel/berebut-berkah-dari-pegunungan-kendeng
  20. Scully, P. (2010). Should we give up on the State? Feminist theory, African gender history and transitional justice*. African Journal on Conflict Resolution, 9(2), 29–44. https://doi.org/10.4314/ajcr.v9i2.52171
  21. Shiva, V. (1988a). Development, Ecology and Women. In Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and Survival in India (hal. 1–13). Zed Books.
  22. Shiva, V. (1988b). Science, Nature, and Gender. In Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and Survival in India (hal. 14–37). Zed Books.
  23. Shiva, V. (1988c). Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and Survival in India. Zed Books.
  24. Shiva, V. (2014a). Homeless in the “Global Village.†In Ecofeminism (hal. 98–107). Zed Books.
  25. Shiva, V. (2014b). Masculinization of the Motherland. In Ecofeminism (hal. 108–114). Zed Books.
  26. Shiva, V. (2014c). Preface to the critique influence change edition. In Ecofeminism (2nd ed.). Zed Books.
  27. Shiva, V. (2016a). Biodiversity and People’s Knowledge. In Biopracy: The Plunder of Nature and Knowlede (hal. 78–96). North Atlantic Books.
  28. Shiva, V. (2016b). The Political and Cultural Cost of the Green Revollution. In The Violence of the Green Revolution: Third World Agriculture, Ecology and Politics (hal. 176–199). University Press of Kentucky.
  29. Sinuko, D. (2016). Massa Pendukung Pabrik Semen Gelar Aksi di Kantor Ganjar. CNN Indonesia. https://www.cnnindonesia.com/nasional/20161213143715-20-179266/massa-pendukung-pabrik-semen-gelar-aksi-di-kantor-ganjar
  30. Subarudi. (2013). Dampak Putusan MK No. 35/PUU-X/2012 terhadap Pengurusan dan Pengelolaan Hutan. Policy Brief, 7(2), 1–8.
  31. Subekti, T. (2016). Konflik Samin vs PT. Semen Indonesia. Jurnal Transformative, 2(2), 189–202. https://transformative.ub.ac.id/index.php/jtr/article/view/136
  32. Sukirno. (2011). Politik Hukum Pengakuan Negara terhadap Masyarakat Hukum Adat dan Hak-Hak Tradisionalnya. Masalah-Masalah Hukum, 3(4). https://doi.org/10.14710/mmh.40.3.2011.375-383
  33. Sulaiman, S., Adli, M., & Mansur, T. M. (2019). Ketidakteraturan Hukum Pengakuan Dan Perlindungan Masyarakat Hukum Adat Di Indonesia. Law Reform, 15(1), 12. https://doi.org/10.14710/lr.v15i1.23352
  34. Syamsudin, S. (2008). Beban Masyarakat Adat Menghadapi Hukum Negara. Jurnal Hukum UII Yogyaata, 15(3), 338–351. https://doi.org/10.20885/iustum.vol15.iss3.art9
  35. Tempo.co. (2015). Begini Kejanggalan Amdal PT Semen Indonesia di Rembang. Tempo.co. https://nasional.tempo.co/read/701899/begini-kejanggalan-amdal-pt-semen-indonesia-di-rembang?page_num=1
  36. Tempo.co. (2016). Pegunungan Kendeng Seharusnya Lumbung Padi, Bukan Tambang. Tempo.co.
  37. Widhana, D. H. (2017). Di Balik Hasil KLHS Tahap I untuk Konflik Semen Rembang. Tirto.id.
  38. Wulansari, I., & Sigit, R. R. (2017). Kendeng dan Gerakan Ekofeminisme. Mongabay.
  39. Virgy, M.A., Putri, A., Naufal, F.A., & Wardhana, A. (2021). Madani Insight: Menakar Perkembangan RUU Masyarakat Hukum Adat. Jakarta: Yayasan Madani Berkelanjutan

Related Articles

View More Articles