Você está na página 1de 45

APPENDIX 3

METHODOLOGY AND DATA USED IN THE STUDY


3.1. MIND FRAME
3.1.1. Context of Research Methodology

The study of climate change vulnerability of the water sector was done in
the context of adaptation.

This subsection briefly argued about the

approach, framework, and common methods to study in the context of the


reference adaptation measures.

1. The principle of Adaptation to Climate Change Impacts

Adaptation is an approach that is important response strategy in an effort


to minimize the dangers of climate change.

Adaptation has several

advantages compared to mitigation. However, adaptation can not replace


the role of mitigation in the policy agenda of action against climate change
impacts. Adaptation plays a role in reducing the impact of climate change
that soon emerged that can not be done by mitigation. However, without a
strong commitment to mitigation, adaptation costs will increase and the
capacity of both individuals and governments will be reduced.
The term adaptation in the broad sense is any modification in natural
systems or human life in reacting to the stimulus or the effect of the current
climate or the climate front is predicted to reduce damage or improve profit
opportunities due to climate change (Stern, 2008). Adaptation is the step
that important in reducing the inevitable impact of climate change today.
Net profit (net benefits) of adaptation can be gain faster than the benefits of
mitigation measures (Berkhout, 2005 in Suroso, DS, 2008) (Figure 3.1) and
can be felt directly by local communities.

This study considered two types of adaptation, namely: adaptation to itself


(autonomus adaptation) and adaptation driven by policy (policy-driven
adaptation) with greater weight on the driven adaptation policies. The study
also involved two levels of adaptation, namely: strengthening adaptive
capacity and implementing adaptation actions. The first level includes the
provision of information about the vulnerabilities and risks of climate
change. While the implementation of adaptation measures include actions
or risk reduction of vulnerability to climate change, for example, related to
the water sector: the creation of absorption wells or rain water reservoirs.

Figure 3.1. Climate change adaptation benefits (Source: Suroso, DS, 2008)
2.

Approach, framework, and General Method of Study

a. General Study Approach

Approach to the study were chosen based on the options study approach to
Climate Change, Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability (PIDAK or Climate
Change Impact, Adaptation and Vulnerability / CCIAV) are available. There

are 5 (five) selection approach (Table 3.1). Four of them classified as oldfashioned

research

approaches,

namely:

assessment

of

impacts,

vulnerability assessment, adaptation studies, and integrated studies.

The

fifth approach is derived from the risk assessment framework which is a


new development in the study PIDAK. This risk-based approach has started
to be applied in mainstreaming adaptation options into policy making
(IPCC, 2007 in Suroso, DS, 2008).
There are some other important trends in the study approach is a shift from
the

approach-driven

research

(research-driven

approaches)

to

the

integration of research into policy-making where the decision makers


(policy-makers) and the stakeholders (stakeholders) together to participate
in inside or jointly move the study (UNDP, 2005).
Vulnerability studies are quite effective in raising awareness of the impact
that may arise from climate change have limited effectiveness in providing
guidelines for adaptation at the local level. Various choices of methods and
tools for vulnerability studies to support the development process is
available with each difference regarding the level data and analysis, area,
planning, and appropriate levels of costs and planning-related areas from
the level of national interest, regional, to local (Table 3.2 ).
Table 3.1
Five Approaches in Climate Change Studies modified from IPCC, 2007
Approach
Impact

Risk
Vulnerabil Adaptati Integratio
ity
on
n

Impact and Processes


Scientifi future
that affect
c Goals climate risks the
vulnerabilit
y to climate

Processes Interaction
that affect and
the
feedback
adaptatio between
n and
many

Risk
assessment
and policy
response

change

adaptive
capacity

drivers and
impacts

Action for
Practical risk
purpose reduction
s

Action to
reduce
vulnerabilit
y

Action to
improve
adaptatio
n

Global
policy
Mainstream
options and ing in policy
fees
making

Study
Standard
Method approach to
PIDAK;
method
DPSIR
(Driverpressurestateimpactresponse or
responseimpactpressure
conditions
as a
driver /);
study driven
risk
reduction
(Hazarddriven risk
assessment)

Vulnerability
Integrated Risk Study
indicators and
assessment Procedure
description; risk of
modeling
Risk is
climate past and
composed
present; livelihoods
Crossof Hazard
analysis; agent-based
sector
and
method;
interaction Vulnerabilit
y
Narrative method
Integration
of climate
Perceptions of resko with other
including the critical
drivers
threshold
Model
Performance
discussion
sustainable policy / stakeholder
development
s
(stakeholder
Relations adaptive s) related to
capacity and
traffic type
sustainable
and scale of
development
Merging
the different
approaches
or models
study

Mobilized
Motivati by the
on
Research
(Research
Driven)

Research Driven

Research
Driven

Source: Suroso, DS (2008)


Table 3.2
Various Levels Vulnerability Study

Mobilized
by Kebijaka
(Policy
Driven)

Data Needs / Study


Depth Analysis
Area Size
Scale
Qualitative

National

Macro

Planning
Levels

The area
Accura of the
cy
tuition
fees per

Adaptation
Policy

Low

Low

Meso The
Regional
Adaptation
combination of
(Province Strategies Mediu
qualitative and
to
m
quantitative
Kabupaten /
Kota)

Medium

Micro Quantitative

High

Local

High
Measureme
nt
Adaptation

Source: Modified from Messner (2005) in Suroso, DS (2008)


This study uses high-level study approaches (meso-level study) which is
part of the overall study approach in many sectors of the middle (meso-level
multi-sectoral approach) to the provincial down to the district town in P.
Lombok. This approach means that the water sector, assess vulnerabilities
to climate change at high levels by considering the impact of climate
change on many sectors in P. Lombok and the depth of analysis and results
at the level of districts / cities in P. Lombok. In the application, specifically
the water sector, this high level study primarily involve the sub unit river
area (SSWS) or watersheds (DAS) in P. major

Lombok as the unit of

analysis regions. In the next stage, the unit area SSWS / main watershed is
then transformated to each administrative unit of the district level.
b. General Framework of Study

Studies of vulnerability and risks of climate change conducted in P. Lombok


in the context of adaptation to the depth of the approach and level of mesolevel studies of this study is a relatively new study in Indonesia.

The

approach was equipped with a framework of study is also relatively new.


Below is a framework grains that become the reference study the impact of
climate change in the water sector is extracted from the whole study sector
proposals (Suroso, DS, 2008):
1. Framework studies in risk assessment framework that integrates the
hazards, vulnerabilities, and risks in a particular relationship of interrelated and affect each other with the study process model as in
Figure 3.2.
2.

Risk (Risk, R) is perlapisan (overlay) or the multiplication of


Hazards (Hazards; H) and vulnerability (Vulnerability, V) in the
notation as given by Affeltranger, et al., 2006 (Figure 3.3);

3. Danger (change) the climate is defined as a function of the character,


magnitude, and speed of change and climate variations.
4.

Vulnerability (vulnerability, V) is a function of the character


(character), quantity (magnitude), and the speed (rate) of the dangers
of climate change and the variation of exposure (exposure), sensitivity
(sensitivity) and adaptive capacity (adaptive capacity) of the system
against character, magnitude, and speed of climate change. In short,
vulnerability is defined as a function of ketersingkapan (exposure, E),
sensitivity (sensitivity, S), and adaptive capacity
AC) against

(Adaptive capacity,

V =of(E climate
x S) / ACchange in
the dangers

the following

relationship:

5.

With the availability of spatial data from each of the data involved,
then the next can be described maps or spatial information from the
hazard, vulnerability and risk (hazard maps, vulnerability maps, risk
maps).

review, monitoring, evaluation

Muatan (Contex): Contex, identification, reasearch on the


climate change,strategy, organitation andrisks

Figure 3.2. Model


risk assessment
process.
Source:
New Zealand
Identification
of risk: hazard
identification
and description
of
Climate Change Office, 2004
risks
Assessing
the existing
Risk ( R ) Analysis
= of risk:
Hazard
(H)
X management
Vulnerabilitymethods
(V)
(existing). Determining the image and the consequences.
Recording Risk

The increasing
Coastal activity
Evaluation of risk:
comparison between criteria,
priority ranking,
of temperature
sector
and the identification of key issues

Rain pattern
Agriculture
changes
Handling risks:
Identify objectives, targets and action on key
issues. Evaluating the costs and benefitsactivity
of thosesector
choices.
Community participation.
Increasing Selecting options, and action plans
Frequence and
Water resource
the intencity of
sector
extreen climate
event

Sea Level Raise


(SLR)

Health sector

Picture 3.3. Chart notation risk. Source: Affeltranger, et al., 2006 in


Suroso, DS, 2008
c. General Method of Study

The steps common method of assessment (Figure 2.2) with interpretation


for the water sector are as follows:
1.

Formulation of the problem and the determination of the charge


(context). These steps are the basic steps, including brainstorming,
public consultation and focus groups, determination of key sectors
vulnerable to climate change. Implementation of these basic steps
performed in conjunction with other sectors. Some of these measures
is something that is given (given), for example : general approach and
study the results of focus groups.

2.

Identification of climate hazards. In this second step, the water


sector,

after

discussions

with

other

sector

teams

to

do

the

modification, the separation berkatan two things: i) the potential


danger, and ii) the danger itself. The potential danger is what is the
risk of Affeltranger notation, et al., 2006 (in Suroso, DS, 2008)
identified

as

the

danger

of

climate,

namely:

an

increase

in

temperature, changes in rainfall patterns, increased frequency and


intensity of extreme climate events, sea level rise ( SLR). As for the
dangers of climate change on the water sector is formulated and
based on the sensitivity of the potential dangers on important aspects
of the water sector.

The potential danger from sector studies and

sector climate sector SLR or something of value given. The rationale


is that the shares are by definition dangerous, symptoms of climate
change is not necessarily the actual danger in the water sector.

In

other words, an initial test of the potential dangers of climate change

on important water sector needs to be done in order to obtain a more


representative danger;
3.

Identify the vulnerabilities of the main sectors affected. Application


of these measures for the water sector is to identify the main
aspects of water sector affected. Implementation is to recognize
the various components of vulnerability, the exposure (E), sensitivity
(S),

and

adaptive

capacity

(AC)

follows

the

relationship

of

vulnerability (V) as a function of E, S and AC in the formula V = (exs) /


AC. Three important considerations here are: (i) further implications
of the dangers that have been identified, (ii) the use of analysis tools,
including geographic information system applications (GIS), and (iii)
the availability of data. The results presented in section 3.1.3;
4.

Analysis and evaluation of risk. As the formula in Figure 2.3, a risk


analysis based on the formulation of risk (R) is composed of hazard
(H) multiplied by the vulnerability (V).

In this step each risk it is

weighted with a certain weighting analysis methods. The results of


weighting and GIS analysis of risk and then evaluated.
5.

The discovery of an adequate adaptation strategies based on risk


obtained. This step is a follow-up of the previous four steps to achieve
goals and objectives of the study.

This step is part to answer the

question of how the risks that have didentifikasi responded and


handled it.
6.

Mainstreaming (mainstreaming) in development policy. The last step


is carried out jointly review the results of other sectors. The goal is
for consideration based on what is best known from the results of
studies on climate change (the best known) may be involved in local
government development policies. The aim is that the best known is
with the use of risk analysis is useful guidelines for local government
to help local communities adapt to climate change are known.

3.1.2

Concept Reference Model and Data Availability

Model reference concept as in Figure 3.4, is defined as the concept of


reference in the study of water sector vulnerability to climate change in
terms of substance the presence of resources or the water sector.

In the

model of this concept are shown the relationships between the sectors of
water and related environmental component, either directly or indirectly.
Model concept (Figure 3.4) has been known to assume complete
information about the parameters of relations with the impact of the water
sector to climate change. This information includes: total population,
lifestyle-related, economic, technological, food, land use, emissions from gas
greenhouse effect, climate, the land of siklous hydrology, water quantity and
quality, the state average and variation of change, use and management of
water.

emissions of
greenhouse
gases

population,
lifestyle,
economy
and
technology

climate

mainland part
of the
hydrological
cycle, water
quantity and
quality, the
state average
and variation
of change
Water
resouerces
management

Land use

Food needs
Water use

Description:
:
:

Dominant influence in the direction


Mutual influence (significantly affect each other)

Figure 3.4. Model concept of reference: the impact of human activities on


water resources and their management by human beings with climate
change as one of the pressure of clean water. Source: IPCC, Working Group
II, 2008.
In fact, especially in developing countries, and more specifically in Lombok
Island, data and information needed to assess the vulnerability of the water
sector to climate change as in the concept model, not available with
complete enough. Even the most basic spatial information even sangatalah
limited.

Based on this, the concept model should be modified for

application in this study as outlined below.

3.1.3. Model concept, Plot Think, and the Framework Study Used
1.

Concepts and Flow Model Used Think

In an effort to identify vulnerabilities and risks to the water sector in the


area of climate change studies used modifications of the concept model
(Figure 3.5 and Figure 3.6). Model concepts used are derived based on the
general approach and limit the level of study, the availability of the data
collected and data meet the criteria selected after evaluation of data.

emissions of
greenhouse
gases

population,
lifestyle,
economy
and
technology

climate

mainland part
of the
hydrological
cycle, water
quantity and
quality, the
state average
and variation
of change
Water
resouerces
management

Land use

Food needs
Water use

Part of the concept of reference model used in the study.


Descriptio : Consideration of climate change that affects only part of the
condition of the land hydrologic cycle and not vice versa
(mainland influence on the climate); as food needs are considered
only in the direction (eg food prodoksi effect on water availability)
n:
and not vice versa (the effect of water availability on food
production ).
: Dominant influence in the direction
: Mutual influence (significantly affect each other)
Figure 3.5. Modification of the model concept used in the study
Based on Figure 3.5, this study restrict the problem on those aspects of the
water sector: the effects of climate change, land use, land part of the
hydrological cycle (water quantity and quality, the average state and
variation changes in water availability), use of water, and management
water.

These aspects and relationships that were reviewed in the study

made clear again in Figure 3.6.

Climate Sector

Land Use

sea level rise,


coastal sector,
the agricultural
sector

Effects
/
potensial
dangers
of
climate
change (CH, T)

Runoff,
evapotranspiration (ET),
infiltration

Water quality

Other relevant data


(population, water
needs, etc)

Condition of average water and the variability (rain


water, rivers, ground water)

Availability of water
(reserve water
capacity)

Floods

Drought

Vulnerability and risk of the water sector / water


balance resources (NSDA/Water Budget)

Water use
other relevant
data (pollution,
etc)

Current water management)

Description:
Data obtained directly (given the data / fix data) the results
of studies in other sectors (eg, sea level rise, sea water
: immersion on the beach, food production)
The data that some of them may be used directly (fix data /
given data), others require several assumptions,
: interpretation and further processing (eg, land use data, the
number and density of population, water needs, water
pollution, irrigation infrasytuktur conditions, etc. )
Results temporary or final analysis involves both direct data
(given the data / fix data) and the assumption of data,
: interpretation, and further processing (eg, runoff,
evapotranspirasi, infiltration, danger to the availability of
water, flood; vulnerabilities and risks of water availability,
flood and drought, etc.)
Relationships affect
:
Interplay
:
Analysis is sought wherever possible quantitative analysis.
Level : However, qualitative analysis is inevitable as the

study interpretation of water quality, water management current


and future projections. This is in accordance with the
existing level of studies at the secondary level and
availability of data.

The flow of thought that are used based on the concept model and the
availability of the data presented in Figure 3.7 a, b, and c below.

Figure 3.7 a. Chronology of thought used in the study


Description:
CH,
CH: rainfall; Q: temperatu; 1961-2007 data and projections
T
: until the year 2100, obtained from the study of climate sector
Sub units = area of the river watershed (DAS) in P. major
SSW : Lombok
S
DRO Direct runoff, obtained from water balance analysis
:
BF
Base flow, obtained from water balance analysis
:
TRO Total runoff = DRO + BF, obtained from water balance analysis
:
CDF Cumulative frequency distribution, obtained from the
: statistical analysis of data or data TRO DRO

Figure 3.7.b. Chronology of thought used in the study - continued-1


Description:
CH

Rainfall Thiessen polygon analysis, data Department of


: Public Works, Prov. NTB, 2007
SSWS
Sub units = area of the river watershed (DAS) in P. major

KS
HL
E, S,
AC

: Lombok
Figures welfare of the population
:
Protection forest (critical levels of protected forest)
:
Components of vulnerability: E = Exposure, S = sensitivity,
: AC = Adaptive Capacity

Note Figure 3.7 a:


Tata guna lahan, data koefisien infiltrasi (tanah / batuan) = land use,
infiltration coefficient data (soil / rock)
Analisis statistik TRO (TRO, DRO, CDF, Tahun) = Statistical analysis TRO
(TRO, DRO, CDF, Year)
Analisis bahaya banjir = flood hazard analysis
Analisis ketesediaan air = analysis of the availability of water
Analisis kekeringan = drought Analysis
Bahaya banjir = Flood Hazard
Bahaya ketersediaan air = water availability Hazard
Bahaya kekeringan = drought hazard
Hasil = result
Note Figure 3.7 b:
Data lainnya (produktifitas, pangan, dll) = other data (productivity, food,
etc.)
Data KS, infrastruktur irigasi = Data KS, irrigation infrastructure
Data geologi / tanah, CH, kekritisan lahan / HL = Data geology / soil, CH,
critical land / HL
Tataguna lahan, kepadatan penduduk, sumber pemenuhan air = land
use, population density, source of fulfillment
Bahaya kekeringan = drought hazard
Analisis komponen kerentanan (E, S, & AC) terhadap bahaya kekeringan
= vulnerability component analysis (E, S, & AC) against the drought
hazard
Analisis komponen kerentanan (E, S, & AC) terhadap bahaya pada
ketersediaan air = vulnerability component analysis (E, S, & AC) against
water availability hazard
Analisis kerentanan (E, S, & AC) terhadap bahaya banjir = vulnerability
analysis (E, S, & AC) against the flooding hazard
Analisis = analysis
Hasil = result

Figure 3.7.c. Chronology of thought used in the study - continued-2


Description:

The study was completed at the outputs of the risk of the water
-- : sector to climate change that already contains information related
to hazards and vulnerability, and outcomes of the proposed
adaptation strategies associated with each of these risks are
presented in maps (GIS map), tables and narratives.
Note Figure 3.7 c:
Data spasial wilayah administrative; data spasial batas SSWS =
administrative area; SSWS boundary spatial dataSpatial data
Bahaya dan komponen kerentanan terhadap bahaya kekeringan terbobot
= Hazard and vulnerability to hazards components weighted drought
Bahaya dan komponen kerentanan terhadap bahaya ketersediaan air
terbobot = Hazard and vulnerability to hazards component of water
availability weighted
Bahaya dan kerentanan terhadap bahaya banjir terbobot = hazard and
vulnerability to flood hazards weighted
Analisis resiko kekeringan = drought risk analysis
Analisis resiko ketersediaan air = risk analysis of water availability
Analisis resiko banjir = flood risk analysis
Resiko sektor air terhadap perubahan iklim P. Lombok = water sector to
climate change Lombok IslandRisk
Usulan strategi adaptasi sektor air P. Lombok = Proposed water sector
adaptation strategies Lombok Island
Analisis resiko dan usulan strategis adaptasi sektor air berdasarkan
wilayah adminstratif = risk analysis and strategic proposals on water
sector adaptation administrative region
Resiko sektor air terhadap perubahan iklim P. Lombok per wilayah
administratif = water sector to climate change Lombok per
administrative regionRisk
Hasil = result

2. Used Framework Study

Following point 1) to 4) mertode steps above kajiantersebut general, the


study of water sector was proposed framework of vulnerability and risk
assessment of water sector to climate change in P. Lombok (Figure 3.8).

Figure 3.8.
Framework for vulnerability assessment and risk assessment of the water
sector, other sectors to climate change in P. Lombok, 2008. E 1, S 1, AC 1 is
the component of vulnerability to hazards 1, R 1 is a risk because the danger
to-1 and susceptibility to 1 (V 1 = (E 1 x S 1) / AC 1) (Source: modification of
Suroso , DS, 2008).
In Figure 3.8, the water sector is one of the studies of all five (5) study,
namely: climate, sea level rise (sea-level rise, SLR), sector of coastal and
beach activities, water sector, and agricultural sectors.

In this case, the

distinction between potential risk and danger where the danger is the
result of further analysis of potential hazards by using the method of study
was chosen at the level used (meso-level study) with a flow of thought as in
Figure 3.7. There are 3 (three) kinds of indications of danger, namely: the
availability of water hazards, flood hazards, and dangers of drought.
Furthermore, each hazard is viewed influence on susceptibility components
for each hazard.

As in the formulation of vulnerability (V) previously

mentioned, there are 3 (three) components of vulnerability: exposure, or


exposure (E), or sensitivity Sensitivity

(S), and Adaptive Capacity, or

adaptive capacity (AC). Considering there are 3 indications of danger, then


there are three sets of components that can be given the vulnerability of
symbols E

1,

2,

3;

1,

2,

and AC

1,

AC

vulnerability of three sets of components are (E


and (E

3,

3,

AC

Risk (R) are: R

1,

3)

1,

and AC
1,

AC

1),

Thus the

3.

(E

2,

2,

AC

2),

for each hazard (B) to -1, the 2nd, and 3rd in from the
2

and R

3.

3.2. DATA USED

To obtain reliable results, the required data as needed each analysis.

To

have carried out data collection and analysis of data obtained by


appropriate methods of analysis with high-level study approaches (mesolevel study).

This section discusses methods of data collection and data

selection methods conducted in the study.


3.2.1 Data Collection Method

The data should be involved in this study is supposed to based spatial data
(spatial data) for each item of data is needed. It was given the results of a
study based on the spatial or in the form of maps. It has been done for the
various data collection methods to obtain as much data as possible and as
completely as possible.

Data collection methods that have been taken

include:
1. The survey, study libraries, surfing the internet and collecting data or
other relevant information.
2.

Public consultation with relevant stakeholders at the beginning of


activities

3. Discussion and implementation of focus group discussion (FGD) with


other parties concerned.

Surveys and literature studies of various institutions or agencies that have


authority in the management of water resources, both at central and
regional. The survey was also conducted on private institutions is estimated
to have relevant data.

Surfing through the internet mainly to do with

regard to methodological or conceptual aspects of the model in order to


develop line of thought in the study.
Public consultation is an important step in this study.

Activities are

designed not only to accommodate the aspirations of NTB Province


Government authorities in P.

Lombok, is also designed to determine the

existence of maps and data needed to gain access to the data.


3.2.2. Data Selection Method

Selection of data is not considering all relevant data to be involved in the


study.

The format of the data in the form of spatial data into one data

selector tool. In brief, selection of data used in this study are:


1.

Data and information is truly relevant to the needs of the study,


explained the source, and a recent data;

2. Data and information is complete for the entire Lombok Island and
consistent in its parts, and the complete sequence (time series) for the
purposes of analysis of time series data;
3. Strived to get the data that is still a raw data or the first-level data;
4. If forced to use data that already experiencing processing or analysis,
then the effort to understand the type and level of analysis has been
done;
5.

Diproritaskan data or information in a spatial format or can be


processed into data or spatial information.

3.2.3. Profile Data Used

Based on data collection methods and data selection, as mentioned above,


the following are presented some data used in the study, including data
needs of water per SSWS, SSWS land critical levels, critical levels of
protected forests, and irrigation infrastructure (springs, embung, and dams
or dam). As for other data such as rainfall, temperature, population density,
local rainfall, and welfare of the population is given directly to the
discussion of vulnerability (Appendix IV).
Table 3.3. P. water needs Lombok in the 10m

/ year

SSWS

Domestic

Agriculture

Industry

Another

Dodokan

108.22

1616.97

647.02

1050.68

Jelateng

7:22

50.86

0:00

14.73

Menanga

34.92

459.93

208.34

256.96

White

18:39

184.90

13.62

96.69

Table 3.4. SSWS lands and critical areas of protected forest per SSWS
(km2)
SSWS Area of Critical
SSWS (km2)
10,698.03
Dodoka
n
10,199.27
Jelaten
g
5,599.92
Menan
ga
White 16,566.84

Broad area of Critical Protection


Forest (km2)
11,754.20
4,265.63
500.00
9,000.00

Table 3.5. Irrigation infrastructure / water: springs


No
1.

LS
8:00

BT
0:57

116.00

Debit (liters / sec)


0:18

276.4

2.

8:00

0:58

116.00

0:18

30.1

3.

8:00

0:58

116.00

0:18

24

4.

8:00

0:57

116.00

0:23

174

5.

8:00

0:57

116.00

0:23

396.8

6.

8:00

0:57

116.00

0:24

123.8

7.

8:00

0:55

116.00

0:24

958.6

8.

8:00

0:58

116.00

0:23

83

9.

8:00

0:54

116.00

0:24

682.9

10. 8:00

0:59

116.00

0:29

22

11. 8:00

0:58

116.00

0:29

4.8

12. 8:00

0:57

116.00

0:35

70

Table 3.5. Irrigation infrastructure / water: springs (continued 1)


No

LS

BT

Debit (liters / sec)

13. 8:00

0:57

116.00

0:35

34.9

14. 8:00

0:57

116.00

0:35

16.7

15. 8:00

0:58

116.00

0:34

34.3

16. 8:00

0:58

116.00

0:35

10

17. 8:00

0:57

116.00

0:34

40

18. 8:00

0:57

116.00

0:35

19. 8:00

0:56

116.00

0:33

4.9

20. 8:00

0:56

116.00

0:33

18.1

21. 8:00

0:56

116.00

0:33

5.9

22. 8:00

0:56

116.00

0:34

103

23. 8:00

0.74

116.00

0:34

12.6

24. 8:00

0:56

116.00

0:34

13.5

25. 8:00

0:56

116.00

0:34

41.6

26. 8:00

0:56

116.00

0:34

17

27. 8:00

0:55

116.00

0:34

28.1

28. 8:00

0:55

116.00

0:34

26.2

29. 8:00

0:55

116.00

0:34

40.5

30. 8:00

0:55

116.00

0:34

67.7

31. 8:00

0:54

116.00

0:34

39.3

32. 8:00

0:54

116.00

0:34

99.3

33. 8:00

0:54

116.00

0:34

93.1

34. 8:00

0:54

116.00

0:35

25.1

35. 8:00

0:57

116.00

0:36

50.8

36. 8:00

0:56

116.00

0:38

39.4

37. 8:00

0:56

116.00

0:38

15.3

38. 8:00

0:56

116.00

0:37

15

39. 8:00

0:58

116.00

0:37

28.5

40. 8:00

0:54

116.00

0:40

4.1

41. 8:00

0:54

116.00

0:40

10.2

42. 8:00

0.65

116.00

0:13

10

43. 8:00

0:39

116.00

0:16

25.4

44. 8:00

0:35

116.00

0:23

15

45. 8:00

0:55

116.00

0:41

73.1

46. 8:00

0:55

116.00

0:41

21.3

47. 8:00

0:55

116.00

0:41

198.3

48. 8:00

0:54

116.00

0:41

39.8

49. 8:00

0:54

116.00

0:41

30.1

50. 8:00

0:55

116.00

0:41

113.8

51. 8:00

0:54

116.00

0:41

24.3

Table 3.5. Irrigation infrastructure / water: springs (continued 2)


No

LS

BT

Debit (liters / sec)

52. 8:00

0:54

116.00

0:40

10.3

53. 8:00

0:53

116.00

0:40

19.3

54. 8:00

0:54

116.00

0:40

9.8

55. 8:00

0:53

116.00

0:47

1233.4

56. 8:00

0:59

116.00

0:45

817.6

57. 8:00

0:58

116.00

0:53

150

58. 8:00

0:57

116.00

0:53

108.4

59. 8:00

0:57

116.00

0:53

107.8

60. 8:00

0:53

116.00

0:54

43.3

61. 8:00

0:55

116.00

0:55

81.6

62. 8:00

0:55

116.00

0:54

117.3

63. 8:00

0:54

116.00

0:54

24.1

64. 8:00

0:54

116.00

0:54

84.7

65. 8:00

0:54

116.00

0:52

109.6

66. 8:00

0:55

116.00

0:52

195.7

67. 8:00

0:55

116.00

0:52

430.3

68. 8:00

0:54

116.00

0:52

47.5

Table 3.5. Irrigation infrastructure / water: Embung


No

Sub

District

Number Embung

Batu Layar

West Lombok

Bayan

West Lombok

Gangga

West Lombok

Gerung

West Lombok

Gunung sari

West Lombok

Kayangan

West Lombok

Kediri

West Lombok

Kuripan

West Lombok

Labuapi

West Lombok

10

Lembar

West Lombok

11

Lingsar

West Lombok

12

Narmada

West Lombok

13

Winners

West Lombok

14

Central Sekotong

West Lombok

15

Tanjung

West Lombok

16

Batukliang

Lombok Tengah

17

North Batukliang

Lombok Tengah

18

Janapria

Lombok Tengah

63

19

Jonggat

Lombok Tengah

Table 3.6. Irrigation infrastructure / water: Embung (continued)


No

Sub

District

Number Embung

20

Kupang

Lombok Tengah

21

Praya

Lombok Tengah

31

22

West Praya

Lombok Tengah

12

23

Praya Barat Daya

Lombok Tengah

24

Praya Central

Lombok Tengah

25

Praya East

Lombok Tengah

64

26

Pringgarata

Lombok Tengah

27

Pujut

Lombok Tengah

28

Aikmel

East Lombok

29

Jerowaru

East Lombok

30

Keruak

East Lombok

106

31

Labuan Haji

East Lombok

32

Masbagik

East Lombok

33

Montong Gading

East Lombok

34

Pringgabaya

East Lombok

35

Pringgasela

East Lombok

36

Sakra

East Lombok

11

37

West Sakra

East Lombok

38

East Sakra

East Lombok

39

Sambelia

East Lombok

40

Selong

East Lombok

41

Sembalun

East Lombok

42

Sikur

East Lombok

43

Suela

East Lombok

44

SUKAMULIA

East Lombok

45

Suralaga

East Lombok

46

Terara

East Lombok

10

47

Wanasaba

East Lombok

48

Ampenan

Mataram

49

Cakranegara

Mataram

50

Mataram

Mataram

Table 3.7. Irrigation infrastructure / water: dams (dams)

Sub

District

No
1

West
Praya

Other
Sub

Lombok Tengah
Mataram, West Lombok, Central
Lombok and East Lombok

Number
Embung
2
0

3.3. ANALYSIS METHOD


Based on the flow of thought, which is used on the basis of data availability
that meet the criteria and the level of meso-level studies, then determined
the appropriate method of analysis and sufficient for the purposes of the
study.

There are 5 (five) important analysis methods used in the study,

namely: (1) Water Balance Analysis (Water Balance Analysis), (2) Statistical
analysis of CDF, (3) Water Budget Analysis (Balance of Water Resources),
(4) weighting, and (5) Geographic Information System (GIS).
Water balance analysis is primarily intended to determine the value of
direct runoff or direct runoff (DRO) and the total value of the total runoff or
runoff (TRO) that rain water will be used in hazard analysis and water
budget analysis. The statistical analysis using the method of cumulative
frequency distribution (CDF), DRO is applied to the data and to identify
hazards TRO water sector. Water budget analysis is used to determine the
availability of water resources compared with the need for water.
Weighting method is used to provide rankings, both hazards, vulnerabilities,
and risks. The GIS method used for the presentation of information in the
form of spatial studies.
3.3.1. Water Balance Analysis Method (Water Balance Analysis)

Method of water balance analysis (NA) or water balance (WB) is used for all
the rainfall data and temperature of Lombok Island obtained (given) the

results of the study of climate sector. The original data used by the sector is
climate observation data from BMG 1 (one) station, namely Station
Selaparang, Mataram, Lombok Island, in the period 1961-2007.

Rainfall

data (CH) and temperature (T) in the projection period until 2100 is
calculated based on modeling (top down) and the observation of the trend
analysis (bottom up) by the study of climate sector.
The purpose of the water balance analysis is to obtain information about
the dangers indications on the water sector, particularly the availability of
water hazards, flood hazards, and dangers of drought in Lombok Island.
Goals of WB analysis was to obtain information about the direct runoff
(DRO), base flow (BF) and total runoff (TRO) from an area under review. In
this unit area was reviewed SSWS (Sub-Unit Area River) or 4 DAS P. major
Lombok, namely SSWS Dodokan, SSWS Jelateng, SSWS Menanga, and
SSWS White.
Water balance calculation principle is the incoming water (water input) into
a system and the water coming out (output water) from the system. Balance
of water from an area, whether it is agricultural land, watersheds
(watersheds or watershed) and the continents, can be determined by
calculating the input, output and changes in water storage in the earth's
surface (Ritter, Michael E., 2006). The main input of water derived from
rain (precipitation, P) and the main output is evapotranspirasi (ET), the
evaporation again either by the plant water, land, water body evaporation
maupu other agents contained in one system
The general water balance equation is

1:

Where:
P = Q + E + P : Rainfall (precipitation)
Q : Runoff (runoff)
S
E : Evapotranspirasi (evapotranspiration)
: Changes in simpaian (storage) in the soil or

bedrock

In subsequent exposure below the water balance analysis will be presented


a water balance calculation method, namely Mock FJ method used in this
study and the Thiessen polygon method is also used in the study when
calculating rainfall based distribus other data from the 2003-2007 period
based observations Department of Public Works (PU), West Nusa Tenggara
province.
1. Water Balance Method Mock FJ

Variations in the use of the water balance of the general formula is made
possible in accordance with the purpose and focus of the study and the area
where the water balance study was conducted and data availability. One of
the water balance method is widely used in Indonesia is to balance water
Mock the FJ method is based on studies conducted in the constituent
regions Bogor, West Java, Indonesia (Mock, FJ, 1973 in Wuryanto, A., and
Sudirman, D., without year). The study used the method of water balance
given the assumption FJ Mock study location is P.

Lombok in the tropics

meet the criteria for the analysis of water balance (water balance) method.

Evapotrancipiration

Evapotranspiration
calculation of potencial
(Penman Method)

rain

Surface water
storage

Surface runoff
Evapotranspirasi actual
calculation

TRO

Infiltration

Water Surplus Calculation

Groundwater
Groundwater runoff
reserves

a.

Base Flow, Direct Runoff and


Storm Runoff calculation

b.

Figure 3.9: The flow chart in FJ method Mock: a. rainfall-runoff model, b.


flow calculations. Source: Wuryanto, A and Sudirman, D., nd.
In the hydrologic cycle, an explanation of the relationship between flows
into (inflow) and outflow (outflow) in an area for a certain period is called
the balance of water or water balance (water balance). These relationships
are more clearly shown in Figure 3.10.

Precipitation

runoff

evaporation

precipitation

rainfall

Perkolasi

Evaporation
Precipitation

Outlet

Percolation

Water vapor

Surface Water

Soil moisture, soil &


water

Figure 3.10. Water Cycle Water in the Balance Merode Mock FJ. Source:
Wuryanto, A and Sudirman, D., nd
Formulation of the water balance FJ Mock is: P = Ea + + TRO with GS
P = precipitation,
Ea = evapotranspirasi
GS = change in groundwater storage, and
TRO = total run-off
Water balance is a closed cycle that occurs for a period of time a certain
annual observations, where no change or groundwater storage GS = 0.
This means that initial determination is based on groundwater storage last
month in the annual review period, so the water balance equation becomes:
P = Ea + TRO
Some of the things that made reference in a debit prediction method with
respect to water Mock balance for the period of time (eg 1 year) are: (1)
Within one year, changes in groundwater storage (GS) must be equal to
zero, and (2) The total number of evapotranspirasi and the total run-off for
one year should be equal to the total presifitasi that occurred in that year.
By taking into account boundary conditions on the water balance, the debit
prediction method would be quite accurate Mock.
2. Thiessen Polygon Method

This

method

attempts

to

balance

the

distribution

of

the

measure

distribution is uneven by providing a factor pembobot (weigthing factor) for


each of each station.

R1
R3

A3
A1

Observation stations are


plotted on a map, and the
drawn line connecting these
stations to the lines
perpendicular to the
connecting line is formed
polygons-polygons around
each station (Figure 3.11).

R2
A2

The sides of each polygon is the outer boundary is assumed to be active for
the relevant station. The area of each polygon is expressed as a percentage
of the total area. The rainfall average for the whole area is calculated by

multiplying the rainfall at each station with a percentage width and


summing . This method considers the variation of rain there is a linear or
ignore orografis influences.
Figure 3.11.

describes the 3 (three) points statsiun climate observations

with observed data, especially rainfall, R

1,

and R

and expansion of the

influence of the points based on how statsiun Thiessen polygons each,


respectively A

1,

and A

area of rainfall between R

Based on the Thiessen polygon method, the

3.
1,

and R

is R

is the amount calculated as

follows:

A1R1 + A2R2 + A3R3


_______________________

3.3.2. CDF Statistical Analysis Method


Statistical analysis methods applied to the analysis

waterbalance,

especially the value of the total runoff (TRO) and direct runoff (DRO). The
goal is to get the limit value of extreme conditions as an indication of
the availability of water hazards, floods, and droughts and their value.
Based on the data variation of rainfall and temperature obtained at baseline
conditions and projections, the cumulative distribution frequency (CDF)
is a tool suitable statistical analysis used in this study.
CDF analysis begins with the sort parameter values TRO baseline
conditions. Next is the appearance frequency value pejumlahan TRO year
parameters that were reviewed in the previous year with a cumulative
sequence of reference the first value of the frequency parameter is 0.
Diprosentasikan and then the results are plotted against these parameters.
So, will obtain a graph berordinat CDF percentage value from 0 to 1, and

parameter values berabsis TRO from the minimum to maximum value for all
conditions from the baseline year. This process is performed to determine
the availability of water under extreme conditions (water avaibility). The
extreme conditions for the determination of flood and drought hazard using
data projected results for all scenarios.
Based on how it will obtain a graph that if the graph is defined upper and
lower values for normal conditions, it will obtain 3 (three) conditions,
namely: 1) above normal or above the upper limit of the selected CDF,
indications of danger associated with flooding, 2) normal values, ie between
the upper and lower limits of the selected CDF, associated with normal
conditions, and 3) below normal, the CDF value below the stipulated limit,
indicate the dangers associated with drought. limit chosen was 15% for the
CDF limit below, and the CDF for the 15% upper limit, with notes, for
indications of flooding, the analyst used the CDF CDF graph of the value of
DRO (direct runoff).
3.3.3. Water Budget Analysis Method
Analysis of water budget or balance of water resources is to find the value
of water balance between water availability and needs.

Values obtained

water balance by reducing water availability values with the value or need
for water consumption for the baseline condition and poyeksi 2030 and
2080 were included in the scenario. Water availability value is calculated
through the balance sheet analysis of water (water balance) is a potential
water and surface water and ground water.

Surface water accounted for

surface water in a stable condition using 75% of the availability of surface


water balance calculations.
Dipertimbangan aspect further in determining the water needs of water
demand and the index of the needs of the average water in unit volume per
unit of demand per unit time, and the projected needs. Based on available

data, determined 4 types of consumption, namely: 1) domestic, 2)


agriculture, 3) industry, and 4) other. The results of water analysis showed
a positive budget adequate water, otherwise a negative value indicates a
lack of water.
The use of water budget analysis is associated with susceptibility or risk of
water availability. In other words, the analysis of water resources balance
(water budget) is one picture of the risks of water availability. It is
considering the water budget analysis has involved the components of
vulnerability with the parameters as reflected in the aspect of availability
(amount of water supply and water quality in and distribution) and water
needs

(population,

agriculture,

industry,

and

the

following

other

distribution).
3.3.4. Weighted Method
Weighting method is a method that is quite complicated and involves many
assumptions. Weighted used to value water sector hazard conditions are
identified, vulnerability to the hazard involved in the study, and the risk for
these hazards and its effect relationship between the parameters involved.
Assumptions used in the selection and determination of value on
vulnerability parameters, such as water demand parameters for components
that are considered equal sensitivity between baseline conditions and
projected conditions (not involving the projection of water needs).

Such

assumptions will determine the degree of reliability of the results of


identification and assessment of vulnerability.
1. Weighting each individual

Based on the existing variation in the aspect of danger and vulnerability,


then used a two-stage weighting between the two were inseparable. The

first stage, determining the value of the difference in the classification of


the lowest values and top value of a parameter value to be given weight,
then the classification is given a weight . The weight for each class value is
determined based on the relationship between the parameters or the
influence of these vulnerabilities to hazards.
Based on the relationship or influence factor is then possible that the
same one parameter will reverse the weight value between its use to
harm each other hazards. For example, rainfall parameters will have the
opposite weight between its use as a component of drought vulnerability to
hazards in comparison to its use as a component of vulnerability to flood
hazards. Weighted first stage can be referred to as weighting each
individually and applied to aspects of hazards, vulnerabilities, and risks.
As an illustration of weighting each individually and weigh the value
determined by the relationship with factors (hazards) that affect given in
Table 3.3 and Table 3.4 below regarding the vulnerability component of the
rainfall parameters.

Table 3.3. Sample weighting rainfall value as a parameter component of


vulnerability to flood hazards
No

Rainfall (mm / year)

Ranking

Weight

2400 <

0:33

2000 sd 2400

0:27

1600 sd 2000

0.2

1200 sd 1600

0:13

<1200

0:07

Table 3.4. Sample weighting rainfall value as a parameter component


decrease vulnerability to drought hazards

No

Rainfall (mm / year)

Ranking

Weight

2400 <

0:07

2000 sd 2400

0:13

1600 sd 2000

0:20

1200 sd 1600

0:27

<1200

0:33

In Table 3.3, there are 5 classification of rainfall with the highest nilan is>
2400 mm / year, until the smallest value is <1200 mm per year.

If the

rainfall data will be included as a component of vulnerability to flood


hazards, then the highest to the lowest weight is proportional to the
greatest rainfall (> 2400 mm / year) to the smallest (<1200 mm / year).
Conversely, if the rainfall data will be used as a component of vulnerability
to the danger of drought, the highest to the lowest weight is proportional to
the value of the lowest rainfall (<1200 mm / year) to highest (> 2400 mm /
year.
2.

Weighting pair wise comparison method

Weighting method of pair wise comparison (PWC) is the second phase


weighting. This is the weighting Weighted overall vulnerability parameters
involved and applied only to components of vulnerability.

However,

implicitly it means also applies to aspects of risk weighting, because the


calculation involves risk vulnerability.
In the second phase has involved the data and the accuracy factor of the
order

or

influence

the

relationship

between

the

parameters

appropriately kerantanan components (wise). The method is mathematically


formulated when will the form as follows: V = (E x S) / V is AC with
weight kerentana; E , S, and AC are the components of vulnerability
exposure, sensitivity and adaptive capacity, and , , and is the coefficient
of influence of the parameters involved in susceptibility components.

"Comparison between couples are wise", as contained in the PWS method is


used to determine the value of the coefficient and , , and , having
previously determined the weight of each parameter component of
vulnerability to hazards is being reviewed based on data accuracy and the
relationship or influence over danger.
As an illustration of weighting methods pair wise comparison (PWC) are
presented in Table 3.5 and Table 3.6 with the involvement of two factors,
namely the accuracy of the data and the influence of the data. In Table 3.5,
there are 7 parameters component of vulnerability, namely Aa, Bb, Cc, Dd,
Ee, Ff, and Gg with each code-share berturu A, B, C, D, E, F, and G. There
are 3 values of data accuracy, namely from highest to lowest is 3, 2, and 1.
Similarly, there are 3 parameters influence the ranking of hazards that were
reviewed, namely from the highest to the lowest effect was 3, 2, and 1. The
value of data accuracy and influence of each parameter of the dangers
presented in Table 3.5.

Table 3.5.
Illustration vulnerability weighting parameter of each Aa, Bb, Cc, Dd, Ee,
Ff, and Gg based on data accuracy and the influence of the parameters of a
hazard
Component
Parameters V

Data
Cod Accuracy
e

Influence
Data

Weight
data

1.Aa

2.Bb

3.Cc

4.Dd

5.Ee

6.Ff

7.Gg

Based on Table 3.5. Can be weighted pair wise comparison as shown in


Table 3.6 by weight as in the second column on the left. Normalization is
made for the value of these weights to produce the coefficient value to be
used in determining the final value of the vulnerability V refers to the
formula: V = (E x S) / AC where the weights in the formula used is based
on the classification of individual weights in the individual parameters
(weighting first stage).
Table 3.6
Illustration weighting a total of 7 vulnerability parameters (Aa, BB Bb, Cc,
Dd, Ee, Ff, and Gg) of a hazard based on the PWC method
A

Weight Norma-lisasi

A 1:00 2:00 3:00 3:00 4:00 4:00 5:00 22:00

1:00

B 0:50 1:00 2:00 2:00 3:00 3:00 4:00 15:50

0:50

C 0:33 0:50 1:00 1:00 2:00 2:00 3:00 9.83

0:33

D 0:33 0:50 1:00 1:00 2:00 2:00 3:00 9.83

0:33

E 0:25 0:33 0:50 0:50 1:00 1:00 2:00 5:58

0:25

F 0:25 0:33 0:50 0:50 1:00 1:00 2:00 5:58

0:25

G 0:20 0:25 0:33 0:50 0:50 0:50 1:00 3:28

0:20

3.3.5.

Methods Geographic Information System (GIS)

Actual weighting method is part of the geographic information system


(GIS) used in this study. Thus, some important tools for the application of

GIS methods in this study, the weighting parameters for GIS analysis has
been discussed in the previous exposure.
As GIS analysis functions, the use of GIS method here is to catch (capture),
store, analyze, manage, and present or display data related to location.
Important device of this GIS analysis is weighted as discussed earlier.
Furthermore, GIS methods used for the more technical aspects of the
analysis of spatial information, including the editing of data and maps,
overlays, and display the results.
standard GIS applications.

How it works following the general

Figure 3.7 shows the scheme using GIS

applications in this study for analysis of vulnerability.


Flow chart in Figure 3.12 describes the steps of GIS applications used in
the study as follows:
1.

Input data analysis water balance (WB) in the form of direct


runoff (DRO) on the projection conditions analyzed by the
method

of

statistical

analysis

of

cumulative

frequency

distribution (CDF) to produce extreme wet conditions (CDF>


0.85 (85%). The result is a flood hazard;
2.

Input data WB analysis of total runoff (TRO) on the baseline


conditions and projections analyzed with statistical analysis
methods to produce normal CDF (0.15-0.85 or 15% - 85% CDF).
The result compared to the projection conditions with baseline
conditions, and if there is a decrease, the decline was a danger,
the danger of decreasing availability of water;

3. WB data input in the form of TRO on the projection conditions


ianalsisi with statistical analysis methods to produce extreme
dry CDF (CDF <0:15 (15%). The result is a danger of drought;

4. Flood hazards compared among each other, resulting in floods


weight different. The same steps taken to decrease hazards and
dangers of water kersediaan drought.
5.

Each of these hazards and then identified the components of


each

vulnerability,

that

is,

by

identifying

the

influence,

relationship or function of these dangers in a number of


potential vulnerability component (indicated by dashed lines in
the figure). Each component has been identified vulnerability is
weighted among individual components of these vulnerabilities;
6.

Results in point 5) of each and then in-overlay and produce


vulnerability to each hazard. In this step is weighted pair wise
comparison method that produces weighting coefficients for risk
assessment;

7. Susceptibility results-komponenya component overlay for each


type of hazard and in-overlay with each of the corresponding
hazard produces risk. Here has involved two types of weighting
the results of the weighting and weighting of individual risk
assessment

by

using

the

coefficient

results

from

step

sebelumnyas;
8. The final result is then served in the form of tables and maps.
Especially vulnerability, the end result is presented in the form
of maps.

Input Data: Direct


Runoff (DRO)
Proyeksi

Input data: TRO


Proyeksi

Extreme Dry

Normal TRO

Input Data:
Total runoff (TRO)
Baseline

Cumulative Distribution
Frequency (CDF)

CDF

CDF: 0.15-0.85
(15%-85%)
Hazard (H) reduction
in water availability

Extreme wet

CDF <0:15 (15%)

CDF>0.85 (85%)

Drought Hazard
(H)

Hazard (H)

R=HxV

R=HxV

R=HxV

(overlay)

(overlay)

(overlay)

Drought Risk (R)

Floods Risk (R)

Risk (R) Reduction in


water availability

Drought
Vulnerability (V)

Floods
vulnerability (V)

vulnerability (V) of
water availability

(overlay)

(overlay)

(overlay)

components of
components
of
drought
drought
vulnerability
vulnerability

Banjir

components of
components
of
flood
vulnerability
flood vulnerability

vulnerability
vulnerability
components
components
decreased
water
decreased
availability water
availability

Figure 3.12. Schemes and flow charts in the study of GIS applications