QUANTITATIVE ASSESSMENT OF SOCIAL VULNERABILITY FOR

LANDSLIDE DISASTER RISK REDUCTION USING GIS APPROACH

(Case study: Cilacap Regency, Province of Central Java, Indonesia)
Arwan Putra Wijaya 1, Jung-Hong Hong 1*
1 Dept. of Geomatics, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan
– arwan.pw08@gmail.com, junghong@mail.ncku.edu.tw

Introduction The disaster perspective • From Table 3 we can see that the damage experienced
• One effort to reduce disaster risk is by reducing the by Pemalang or Cilacap regency due to the disaster is
Date Disaster Damage Location
level of vulnerability. One part of vulnerability is a 12/31/’17 Strong wind 160 of houses were damaged and Pemalang
physical damage such as damage to houses, damage to
social vulnerability. 14 of people were injured infrastructure such as roads, electricity. As for the
• There are many models that can be used to 02/07/’17 Flood The water level reached 120 m, Pemalang social impact, it is necessary to evacuate a number of
hundreds of houses submerged,
determine social vulnerability. And each model uses but no residents who want to affected people. From there are two possible reasons
different parameters. 02/07/’14
evacuate
429 of houses were damaged and Pemalang for this condition. The first possibility because of the
landslide
• Quantitative assessment helps to provide a reference 2071 of people evacuated disaster experienced is a disaster with a small scale.
to analyze the vulnerability of individual 12/16/’17 Earthquake 5 of houses damaged, electricity Cilacap The second possibility is that the residents are already
died, residents scattered away
administrative units, as well as the spatial patterns from the beach familiar with the disaster, so they can take
for the whole region or even country. 11/14/’17 Flood and 210r of houses buried in Cilacap
preparedness in dealing with the disaster so that it can
landslide landslides
• To support the analysis of social vulnerability, the Figure 1. Map of mass movement prone zone in Central java minimize the number of victims and losses due to the
07/19/’06 as many as 34 people died Cilacap
following perspectives are considered in this paper. © Department of Energy and Mineral Resources (ESDM) of
Tsunami
disaster.
The first is the historical disaster events occurred in Central Java province Copyright 2018 • One of the important factors related to the social
the region. The second is the land use and people's From the past history, Central Java is a region Table 3. A number of disasters that attacked Pemalang and
vulnerability that can be drawn from a disaster that
livelihood. The final consideration is an industry. under many types of hazard threats, such as Cilacap
often occurs in Central Java is knowledge about
• Central Java is one of 34 provinces in Indonesia, floods, landslides, volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, disasters. The higher the knowledge of a person or
which has the fifth largest population density after etc. Among them, floods and landslides are the community about a disaster, the lower the level of
Yogyakarta, with a population density of 1155 people two most frequent types of disasters experienced vulnerability.
/ km2 by the people of Central Java.

Model A : The Regulation of the Head of National Agency Population and industrial perspective
for Disaster Management (BNPB) Number 2 of 2012 There is a discrepancy between population growth
and the number of workers. If the population
Factors Weight Class Score
increases, then the number of workers should also
(%)
Low Medium High increase. The reality is the opposite, the population
1.Density of 60 <500 500 – 1000 >1000 Class / The increase, the number of workers decreases, and the
Population people
/km2
people/km2 people/km2 maximum
value of the
number of unemployed actually increases. This
class means that the problem of vulnerability is not only for
2.Sex ratio (10%) 40 <20 % 20 – 40 % >40 %
the population but also for the unemployment rate.
3.Dependency Where,
ratio (10%)
SoVI = Social Vulnerability Index of the assessed
4.Disability ratio area
(10%)
Sex ratio = the ratio of the number of comparisons Figure 4. Graph of workers, population, and unemployment
5.The poor ratio between men and women
(10%)
Dependency ratio = the ratio of the number of Because people who do not have jobs tend to
Table 1. The factors of social vulnerability (BNPB, 2012) comparisons between ages 15-64 years with ages 0- be lower self-confidence than those who
14 years and> 65 years have jobs. And low self-confidence of people
who tend to be more vulnerable in the face of
Disability ratio = the ratio of the number of comparisons between disability population with a healthy population problems, including disaster than, those
The poor ratio = the ratio of the number of comparisons between the poor and the affluent population whose confidence is high.

Model B : Frigerio, I., et al. (2016) For easier analysis and comparison, the value
of each indicator is calculated following
Scheme of the idea of social vulnerability
Variables Indicators Impact on social equation (1):
vulnerability ( ) These factors are grouped into three main
•
•
The rate of children <14 years
The rate of elderly >65 years
Age Increase = (1) factors:
•
•
Dependency ratio
Elderly index Where, Internal factors. That is the factor
• Female labor force employed Employment Decrease Zij= normalized value of different social inherent in the human being as a social
• Labor force employed Increase
• Unemployment rate vulnerable factors (j) in the certain assessed being naturally, for example; population,
• Commuting rate
area (i); population density, gender, age, health,
• Index of high education Education Decrease
• Index of low education Increase Xij= value of different social vulnerable factor and others.
• Population density Anthropization Increase
(j) in the certain assessed area (i); The ability to recognize disasters. The
• Urbanized index for residential use
• Crowding index Mj= average value of certain social vulnerable capabilities possessed by humans both
Quality residential Residential
property
Decrease
factor (j); individually and in groups in recognizing
Foreign resident Ethnicity Increase SDj= standard deviation of certain social or understanding disasters that will or are
being faced. This factor is influenced by
Table 2. The indicators and variables of social vulnerability (Frigerio, I., et al, vulnerable factor (j);
2016) i = different area of assessment the level of education, training that has
j = different social vulnerable factors been followed, or experience. Figure 5. Diagram of factors affecting SoVI
The calculated results are later used to compute SoVI
following equation (2): SoVIi= Social Vulnerability Index of the The ability to take preparedness. The ability to deal with disasters is a capability that people possess either
∑ assessed area (i); individually or in groups to take preventive or rescue measures in the face of disasters. This factor is
= (2) N= number of social vulnerable factors influenced by; owned jobs, income owned, residential houses and other factors.

Results
Figure 2 shows the comparative results of the two
models, the yellow squares show the area having
high social vulnerability values in both models.
The area is Pemalang regency. While the green
squares indicate the areas experiencing the
different levels of social vulnerability from the two
models. The area is Cilacap regency. The first
model classifies the area into the highest
vulnerability class, while the second model
classifies the area into the class of medium
vulnerability. The different classified results
certainly imply different actions and priority to the
government.
Figure 2. The results of a social vulnerability index; (a).
Frigerio, I., et al. (2016); (b) BNPB (2012)
Conclusion
From the analysis results obtained conclusion as follows:
• The vulnerability is one of the defining components of disaster
risk. Therefore need to be considered to be reduced, in order to
reduce the risk of disaster as well.
• One way to reduce social vulnerabilities is to consider the
factors that compose. And based on the analysis result
obtained three main factors that can arrange social
vulnerability that is; internal factors, ability to recognize
disaster and ability to take preparedness.
• The model of Frigerio, I., et al (2016) with the more diverse
factors tends to be more giving more clues to assessing social
vulnerability, than the model of BNPB (2012) which only uses
internal factors.
• It is necessary to do research related to the comparison of
these two models or new models suggested in other parts of
Indonesia or regions in other countries so that the assessment
of these models can be tested in different areas of different
conditions.

Technical Commission IV Symposium 2018

October 1 – 5, 2018, Delft, The Netherlands