Faktor keberhasilan rehabilitasi dan rekonstruksi pascagempa berbasis persepsi lokal (Kasus: Kalurahan Segoroyoso, Kabupaten Bantul

Vicky Dwi Settyawan, Nur Miladan, Mochamad Primasakti Satyagraha

Abstract

The 2006 earthquake in Bantul Regency caused severe physical and socio-economic damage, necessitating extensive post-disaster rehabilitation and reconstruction. Segoroyoso Village, located along the Opak Fault, experienced one of the highest levels of damage yet demonstrated relatively successful and sustainable post-disaster recovery. This study aims to identify key factors influencing the success of post-earthquake rehabilitation and reconstruction based on local community perceptions in Segoroyoso Village, Bantul Regency. A quantitative approach using Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was employed to analyze questionnaires administered to 97 respondents. A total of 24 variables representing social, economic, institutional, and physical aspects were analyzed using JASP software. The results identify four main factors influencing post-disaster recovery success: (1) information management and coordination, (2) level of physical damage caused by the earthquake, (3) regional and community economic recovery, and (4) community participation and collaboration. The findings indicate that successful post-disaster recovery is determined not only by technical support and external assistance but also by strong community involvement, institutional readiness, and effective cross-sectoral information and coordination systems. This study contributes to the formulation of adaptive and participatory post-disaster regional development strategies based on local data.

Keywords

Earthquake; Exploratory Factor Analysis; Local Perception; Post-Disaster Recovery; Rehabilitation and Reconstruction

Full Text:

PDF

References

[1]Kementerian Energi dan Sumber Daya Mineral. Peraturan Menteri Energi dan Sumber Daya Mineral Nomor 15 Tahun 2011 tentang Pedoman Mitigasi Bencana Gunungapi, Gerakan Tanah, Gempa Bumi, Dan Tsunami. 2011.

[2]Badan Meteorologi Klimatologi dan Geofisika. Katalog Gempabumi Signifikan dan Merusak 1821 - 2018. Jakarta Pusat: Badan Meteorologi Klimatologi dan Geofisika; 2019.

[3]Bappenas, Pemerintah Provinsi dan Daerah D.I. Yogyakarta, Pemerintah Provinsi dan Daerah Jawa Tengah, Mitra International. Penilaian Awal Kerusakan dan Kerugian Bencana Alam di Yogyakarta dan Jawa Tengah. Jakarta: 2006.

[4]United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Nepal. Supporting Nepal in Building Back Better: UNDP Strategy for Earthquake Recovery Assistance. Lalitpur: 2016.

[5]Han Z, Waugh WL. Disaster Recovery in Asia: An Introduction. Recovering from Catastrophic Disaster in Asia, 2017, p. 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2040-726220160000018001.

[6]Smith GP, Wenger D. Sustainable Disaster Recovery: Operationalizing An Existing Agenda. Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research, 2007, p. 234–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-32353-4_14.

[7]Bakti HK, Nurmandi A. Pemulihan Pasca Bencana Gempa Bumi Di Lombok Utara Pada Tahun 2018. Jurnal Geografi 2020;12:137–51. https://doi.org/10.24114/jg.v12i02.16750.

[8]Winarti C. Rekonstruksi Rumah Pasca Gempa Menggunakan Strategi Penduduk Dengan Modal Sosial (Social Capital) Di Dusun Baran, Srihardono, Bantul. Jurnal Rekayasa Lingkungan 2019;19:1–18. https://doi.org/10.37412/jrl.v2i2.3.

[9]Malikusniyah Y. Partisipasi Masyarakat Dalam Program Rehabilitasi Dan Rekonstruksi Erupsi Gunung Merapi Tahun 2010 Di Kecamatan Srumbung Kabupaten Magelang. Undergraduate Thesis. Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, 2016.

[10]Ong JM, Jamero MaL, Esteban M, Honda R, Onuki M. Challenges in Build-Back-Better Housing Reconstruction Programs for Coastal Disaster Management: Case of Tacloban City, Philippines. Coastal Engineering Journal 2016;58. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0578563416400106.

[11]Yusri D, Setiawan A, Adwiyah R, Mulyati H. Studi Identifikasi Relokasi Atau Rekonstruksi Tempat Tinggal Sebagai Sebuah Pilihan Penanganan Pasca Gempa Cianjur 2022 Berbasis Perspektif Masyarakat. Risalah Kebijakan Pertanian Dan Lingkungan Rumusan Kajian Strategis Bidang Pertanian Dan Lingkungan 2023;10:75–87. https://doi.org/10.29244/jkebijakan.v10i2.48467.

[12]Octavia Y wanda, Kusmita T, Mardiyanto M. Penentuan Tingkat Resiko Gempabumi Berdasarkan Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) di Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta. Jurnal Riset Fisika Indonesia 2024;5:1–8. https://doi.org/10.33019/jrfi.v5i1.3805.

[13]Java Reconstruction Fund. Dua Tahun Setelah Gempa Bumi Dan Tsunami Jawa: Melaksanakan Rekonstruksi Berbasis Masyarakat, Meningkatkan Transparansi. Jakarta: 2008.

[14]Fitri AH. Pelaksanaan Percepatan Rehabilitasi dan Rekonstruksi Pasca Bencana Gempa Bumi Berdasarkan Instruksi Presiden Nomor 5 Tahun 2018 (Studi di Desa Kekait Lombok Barat. Undergraduate Thesis. Universitas Mataram, 2019.

[15]Kholil K, Setyawan A, Ariani N, Ramli S. Komunikasi Bencana Di Era 4.0: Review Mitigasi Bencana Gempa Bumi Di Lombok Propinsi Nusa Tenggara Barat (Disaster Commuication in 4.0 Era: Review Earthquake Disaster Mitigation in Lombok West Nusa Tenggara). Proceedings of National Colloquium Research and Community Service, vol. 3, Balunijuk: Proceedings of SNPPM FT UBB; 2019, p. 212–5.

[16]Albrito P. Local Level Implementation of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 2018;31:1307–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2017.12.005.

[17]Trell E-M, Restemeyer B, Bakema MM, Hoven B van. Governing for Resilience in Vulnerable Places. London: Routledge; 2017. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315103761.

[18]Hallegatte S, Vogt-Schilb A, Rozenberg J, Bangalore M, Beaudet C. From Poverty to Disaster and Back: a Review of the Literature. Econ Disaster Clim Chang 2020;4:223–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41885-020-00060-5.

[19]Hallegatte S. A Normative Exploration of the Link Between Development, Economic Growth, and Natural Risk. Econ Disaster Clim Chang 2017;1:5–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41885-017-0006-1.

[20]Putra HS. Natural Disaster and Poverty in Indonesia. Jurnal Transformasi Administrasi 2017;7.

[21]Pu G, Chang-Richards A, Wilkinson S, Potangaroa R. What Makes a Successful Livelihood Recovery? A Study of China’s Lushan Earthquake. Natural Hazards 2021;105:2543–67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-020-04412-y.

[22]Sürücü L, Yıkılmaz İ, Maşlakçı A. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) in Quantitative Researches and Practical Considerations. Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi 2024;13:947–65. https://doi.org/10.37989/gumussagbil.1183271.

[23]Homeland Security. Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA) and Stakeholder Preparedness Review (SPR) Guide Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG) 201. FEMA.gov; 2018.

[24]Sanderson D, Heffernan T, DeSisto M, Shearing C. Community‐Centred Disaster Recovery: A Call to Change the Narrative. Disasters 2025;49. https://doi.org/10.1111/disa.12655.

[25]Sungkawa D. Dampak Gempa Bumi Terhadap Lingkungan Hidup. Jurnal Geografi Gea 2016;7. https://doi.org/10.17509/gea.v7i1.1706.

[26]Gkoumas I, Mavridou T, Seymour V, Nanos N. Post-Disaster Housing and Social Considerations. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 2025;124:105537. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2025.105537.

[27]Mao Q, Du J, Wu Y, Tasken J, Li Y. Effects of Compensation Measures on Post-earthquake Building Reconstruction by Taking Reconstruction Factors as Mediating Variables: Evidence from China. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science 2025;16:262–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-025-00633-6.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.20961/region.v21i1.103358

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.