Analisis Kebijakan Pengadaan Tanah dan Metode Penilaian Ganti Kerugian Aset Masyarakat yang Terkena Dampak Pembangunan (Studi Kasus Jalan Tol Trans Sumatera)

Abstract

Infrastructure development, land acquisition is often required, with most of the land belonging to the community. The government is obligated to provide compensation for the acquired land. However, in several project locations, affected communities have rejected the land acquisition due to dissatisfaction with the compensation value. This research aims to analyze land acquisition policies and compensation assessment methods applied to communities affected by infrastructure development, with a focus on the Trans Sumatra Toll Road (JTTS) project. It also seeks to examine how these policies impact affected communities, particularly regarding whether the compensation received reflects the true economic value and addresses social justice concerns. This study arises from recurring issues in land acquisition for large-scale infrastructure projects, notably inequity in determining compensation value and its social-economic impact on affected communities. This study shows three main results. First, the implementation of land acquisition for the construction of the Trans Sumatra Toll Road (JTTS) is carried out by referring to the land acquisition policy in accordance with Law No. 2 of 2012 and its derivative regulations. The policy includes procedures for implementing land acquisition consisting of 4 (four) stages, namely planning, preparation, implementation and handover of results. This policy also regulates the types and forms of compensation that can be given to affected parties. However, the regulation regarding the type of non-physical loss has not been explained in detail and comprehensively. The implementation of the land acquisition policy that is a reference for the implementation of land acquisition for the construction of the JTTS has not been able to fully guarantee the welfare of the community, especially affected households. Of the 100 respondents interviewed, 49% of respondents stated that their current living conditions are much worse than before land acquisition for the construction of the JTTS and only 26% stated that their living conditions were better than before. Second, the method of assessing compensation for assets affected by land acquisition for public interest infrastructure development refers to the Indonesian Assessment Standard 204 (SPI204) and Indonesian Assessment Guidelines 04 (PPI04) which are in line with Law No. 2 of 2012 and its derivative regulations. This standard provides clear guidelines in the assessment process, with the compensation value calculated based on the list of objects listed in the nominative list compiled by the Land Acquisition Implementation Team. However, the results of testing using the TOPSIS method show that the method of assessing compensation for land affected by JTTS development does not fully reflect the actual land value. In testing non-land values using the provisioning service method, it was found that the non-land compensation value for rice fields of IDR 36,809,815.95 per hectare was smaller than the provisioning service value for rice fields for one year, which was IDR 52,947,889. On the other hand, the non-land compensation value for corn fields of IDR 47,460,000 per hectare is greater than the provisioning service value for corn fields for one year (IDR 26,575,900), but smaller when compared to the provisioning service value for a period of two years. This result is in line with the survey which showed that 31% of residents were dissatisfied (21%) and very dissatisfied (10%) with the compensation value received. Third, based on the Regulatory Impact Assessment (RIA) analysis, it was concluded that the compensation assessment did not fully reflect the lost economic and ecological value. The recommendation proposed in this study, in accordance with the RIA, is to amend the laws and regulations related to the compensation value by including a list of types of non-physical losses that can be compensated along with instructions for their implementation. In addition, the assessment of land compensation can be carried out by considering several aspects of the land value theory put forward by Ricardo (1817) and Johann Heinrich von Thünen (1928) which include proximity to economic centers, main transportation routes and markets. In addition, the compensation value also needs to accommodate non-physical compensation which includes loss of business income, loss of jobs, loss of crops, loss of land and remaining buildings, loss of access to resources, and loss of environmental functions, including water absorption and flora and fauna habitats. The limitations of this study lie in the limited data on the long-term social impacts on affected communities, as well as the limited interviews with parties directly involved in land acquisition policies. The implications of this study offer valuable insights for policymakers, emphasizing the need to deeply consider the social and economic aspects of the community in the planning of land acquisition policies, and emphasize the importance of using a fair assessment method that takes into account the real conditions of the affected community. As a recommendation, this study suggests a revision of the land acquisition policy to be more transparent and participatory, as well as the use of assessment methods that are more objective and take into account community interests.