Availability of information as an important element in disaster preparedness :: Case study in Sumber Agung Vilage-Bantul Earthquake on 27b May 2006

SUSANTI, Defi, Dr. Junun Sartohadi, M.Sc

2008 | Tesis | S2 Magister Geo Informasi dan Penataan Ruang dan M

Gempa berkekuatan relatif cukup besar terjadi di Kabupaten Bantul menyebabkan banyak korban. Dan data yang ada, korban yang tewas maupun luka parah disebabkan oleh tertimpa material bangunan yang roboh. Konsep rumah tahan gempa menjadi topik yang hangat dibicarakan setelah gempa terjadi. Pertanyaannya adalah apakah informasi tersebut sudah didistribusikan kepada masyarakat sebelumnya? Bagaiinana seharusnya informasi ¡tu dapat digunakan setelah gempa?. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengidentifikasi dan menganalisa ketersediaan informasi sebagai elemen yang penting dalam fase persiapan menghadapi bencana serta menghubungkannya dengan faktor sosial ekonomi di lokasi penelitian. Informasi dalam penelitian ¡ni dibatasi oleh 3 jenis yaitu informasi tentang panduan menghadapi gempa burni (yang diadaptasi dan FEMA guideline), informasi tentang rumah tahan gempa set-ta informasi tentang strategi mitigasi. Desa Sumber Agung dipilih secara random, sedangkan Kecamatan Jetis dipilih dengan metode Purposive Sampling dimana Jetis adalah kecamatan yang mengalarni kerusakan bangunan paling banyak dibandingan dengan kecamatan lain. Sebanyak 60 sampel diambil dengan menggunakan metode Non Proportional Stratified sampling berdasarkan 3 level kategori rurnah rusak yang ditetapkan oleh Departernen Pekerjaan Umum. Hasil analisa Informasi tentang langkah-langkah protektif , dan total 26 Iangkah yang diasumsikan rnempunyai nilai yang sarna, dianggap sebagai indikator kesadaran, sebanyak 48,33% mempunyai nilai O yang artinya mereka tidak tahu informasi apapun. Mereka tersebar merata di Desa Sumber Agung. Untuk informasi rumah tahan gempa (kondisi sebelum gempa terjadi), hanya 8,33% responden yang tahu, dan setelah gempa terjadi terjadi peningkatan jumlah responden yang tahu menjadi 67%. Untuk informasi strategi mitigasi, informasi fase sebelum gempa hanya ada 8.33% respondents yang tahu hanya salah satu dan total informasi. Sedangkan pada fase selama gempa, 28% responden mengetahui semuajenis informasi dan mereka berada di Dukuh Barongan. Respondents lainnya mengetahui 1-5 jenis infornasi. Ketigajenis informasi ini dipakai sebagai kriteria kesadaran tingkat responden, hasilnya 33 % responden masuk kategori rendah, 67% sedang namun tidak ada yang terkategori tinggi. Dengan trauma yang relatif besar, responden menolak adanya pusat informasi gempa. 1-Ial ini menjadi tugas pernerintah untuk mencari cara yang lebih tepat dalam upaya pendidikan masyarakat.

High magnitude earthquakes have been taken place several times since the year of 2000 in various areas in Indonesia. The ones which had happened in Bantul regency crated a lot of victims, based on the research data, the dead or injured victims were cracked down by the fallen building materials. This sort of condition was caused by some several factors, such as unavailability of the adequate information to give a feed back and reduce the effect of the disaster. The design of earthquake resistant building became a popular issue once after the disaster had been happened. The question is, have the information related been distributed before and after the disaster had been happened, or is it such a temporary state of mind. How to manage information properly after the disaster? This research is trying to identify and analyze the availability of the information as an important element on the phase of disaster preparedness and find out the socio-economic background of the society. The information discussed is about prevention would have been done by the society in order to minimize the effect (adapted by FEMA guidelines), the earthquake resistant building design, and the mitigation strategy which would have been done by the government considering the society is the subject of the disaster. There were approximately 60 samples taken by using non proportional stratified sampling method, which were categorized into three different levels, based on the damage level (high, medium, and low). Each level was taken randomly with various portion, interview was done to respondents by using questioners.) The information about protective measure which is adapted by the FEMA guideline has a result; by a decision as 26 steps on this kind of guideline assumed to be balance and same in value, which means more than half of respondents (48.33%) having zero point, as acknowledged they have no idea how to access all the information provided on the guideline. They spread all over the area of Sumber Agung village, which was an area for the research. There were only 8.33% respondents understood about the earthquake resistant building design before the disaster happened, and showing a significant improvement has became 67% after the disaster for the information about it. For the mitigation strategy information which has been being done by the government, there were 8.33% of the respondents understood about and they are located in Dukuh Pangkah, and the rest of them about 91.67% did not understand what that is all about. On the phase during the earthquake, about 28.33% respondents understood about all the information and they are located in Dukuh Barongan. The other respondents have 1-5 types of information in this phase. In post earthquake phase, about 30 % respondents understood about all the information and the other have 1-5 information. With the high-trauma haunted (62%), most of respondents (51%) refuse the information centre building. It became the input for the government finding more things out which are acceptable by the society to provide adequate information about earthquake.

Kata Kunci : Gempa Bumi,Strategi Mitigasi,Rumah Tahan Gempa, earthquake, information, protective measures, earthquake resistant building, mitigation strategy