Problematika Sumberdaya Arkeologi Perkotaan: Studi Kasus Kota Lama Kendari
Abstract
This paper was written out of concerns about archaeological resources in the old town of Kendari which are currently under threat due to the rapid development. Here, factors causing this situation are identified and discussed. The data were collected through observation and library study, then analyzed to provide an overview of what actually occurred. Apparently, human factor played an important role in the loss of archaeological resources in Kendari, either due to ignorance, neglect or policy. This situation is exacerbated by obstacles in its preservation, namely the absence of a cultural heritage designation and the heritage expert team that is responsible for drafting heritage recommendation. This study suggests a number of conservation means to be carried out immediately: (a) establishing cultural heritage with its delineation limits, (b) formulating an area conservation policy through the RTRWK, (c) zoning, (d) involving the community, (e) socializing Cultural Conservation Law and its derivatives, and (f) the establishment of a participatory management body.
===
Tulisan ini berangkat dari keprihatinan terhadap sumberdaya arkeologi di kawasan kota lama Kendari yang saat ini terancam kelestariannya akibat pesatnya perkembangan kota. Sejumlah faktor penyebab keadaan itu terjadi diidentifikasikan dan didiskusikan. Pengumpulan data dilakukan melalui observasi dan penelusuran sumber pustaka. Hasilnya dianalisis dalam konteks yang lebih luas untuk dapat memberikan gambaran fenomena yang sesungguhnya terjadi. Rupanya, faktor manusia memainkan peran penting dalam musnahnya sumberdaya arkeologi di kawasan kota lama Kendari, baik karena ketidaktahuan, pengabaian, maupun kebijakan. Keadaan ini diperburuk dengan adanya hambatan dalam pelestariannya, yaitu belum adanya penetapan Cagar Budaya dan Tim Ahli Cagar Budaya. Kajian ini menyarankan sejumlah langkah pelestarian untuk segera dilakukan: (a) penetapan cagar budaya dengan batas delineasinya, (b) rumuskan kebijakan pelestarian kawasan melalui RTRWK, (c) melakukan zonasi, (d) pelibatan masyarakat, (e) sosialisasi UU No 11 tahun 2010 tentang Cagar Budaya dan turunannya, dan (f) pembentukan lembaga pengelola beranggotakan pemangku kepentingan.
References
Amril, F. (2016). Cyber Arkeologi Dalam Komunikasi Arkeologi Kepada Publik Sebagai Sarana Pelestarian Cagar Budaya. Jurnal Konservasi Cagar Budaya, 10(2), 3–9. https://doi.org/10.33374/jurnalkonservasicagarbudaya.v10i2.149
Bandari, F., & Oers, R. va. (2012). The historic urban landscape: Managing heritage in an urban century. Wiley Blackwell.
Batubara, A. M. (2015). Menjadi Modern Tanpa Kehilangan Identitas: Problematika Pelestarian Cagar Budaya di Wilayah Sulawesi Tenggara. Jurnal Konservasi Cagar Budaya, 9(1), 4–16. https://doi.org/10.33374/jurnalkonservasicagarbudaya.v9i1.158
Carman, J. (2002). Archaeology and heritage: An introductione. Continuum.
Harjiyatni, F. R., & Raharja, S. (2012). Perlindungan Hukum Benda Cagar Budaya Terhadap Ancaman Kerusakan Di Yogyakarta. Mimbar Hukum, 24(2), 187–375.
Howard, P. (2003). Heritage: Management, Interpretation, Identity. Continuum.
Khalaf, R. W. (2020). The Implementation of the UNESCO World Heritage Convention: Continuity and Compatibility as Qualifying Conditions of Integrity. Heritage, 3(2), 384– 401.https://doi.org/10.3390/heritage3020023
Mansyur, S. (2019). Perkembangan Arsitektur Masa Kolonial Di Kota Palopo (1908-1940). Jurnal Tumotowa, 2(2), 92–105.
Mundardjito. (2008). Konsep Cultural Resource Management dan Kegiatan Pelestarian Arkeologi Indonesia. In Pertemuan Ilmiah Arkeologi (PIA) XI. Solo, 13-16 Juni. IAAI.
Nocca, F. (2017). The Role of Cultural Heritage in Sustainable Development: Multidimensional Indicators as Decision-Making Tool. Sustainability, 9(10). https://doi.org/10.3390/su9101882
Pasaribu, Y. A. (2016). Permasalahan Pendaftaran dan Penetapan Cagar Budaya di Tingkat Pemerintah Daerah; Kinerja Program Pendukungan Pendaftaran dan Penetapan Cagar Budaya Direktorat Pelestarian Cagar Budaya dan Permuseuman Hingga September 2016. Jurnal Konservasi Cagar Budaya, 10(1), 64–69. https://doi.org/10.33374/jurnalkonservasicagarbudaya.v10i1.148
Pearson, M., & Sullivan, S. (2013). Looking after heritage places: The basics of heritage planning for managers, landowners and administrators. Melbourne University Press. Peraturan Daerah Kota Kendari Nomor 21 Tahun 2013 Tentang Cagar Budaya Kota Kendari, (2013).
Prasetyo, B. (2018). Efektifitas Pelestarian Cagar Budaya Dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2010 Tentang Cagar Budaya.
Purnawibowo, S., & Koestoro, L. P. (2016). Analisis Stakeholders dalam Pengelolaan Sumber Daya Arkeologi di Kota Cina, Medan. Amerta, 34(1), 65.https://doi.org/10.24832/amt.v34i1.77
Rabani, L. O. (2016). Menafsir Ulang Sejarah Perkembangan Kota Kendari: Implikasi Dari Kekacauan Sosial Sebelum dan Sesudah Kemerdekaan. Jaringan Kebangsaan AntarNusa: Prosiding Seminar Nasional 71 Tahun Indonesia Merdeka, 121–134.
Riyanto, S. (2018). Publikasi Cagar Budaya Untuk Pariwisata. Tumotowa, 1(1), 35–47. https://doi.org/10.24832/tmt.v1i1.9
JANUS publishes articles under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, with the copyright held by the journal.
This means anyone can copy, transform, or redistribute articles for any lawful purpose in any medium, provided they give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and JANUS, link to the license, indicate if changes were made, and redistribute any derivative work under the same license.
Once articles are accepted and published on this website, the author(s) agree to transmit the copyright to JANUS .
===
Author Self-Archiving Policy
As this journal runs an open-access model, author(s) are permitted and encouraged to post items published by this journal on personal websites or institutional repositories both prior to and after publication while providing bibliographic details that credit, if applicable, its publication in this journal.
