Você está na página 1de 12

Slamet Trisutomo

Island Tourism in Makassar: An Assessment on Infrastructures


of Laelae, Barrang Lompo and Samalona Islands

ISLANDS TOURISM IN MAKASSAR: AN ASSESSMENT ON


INFRASTRUCTURES
OF LAELAE, BARRANG LOMPO, AND SAMALONA
Slamet Trisutomo1),
1)

Urban and Regional Planning Study Programs, Hasanuddin University, email: trisutomo@gmail.com

Abstract
Tourism plays very important role in alleviating local economy development.
Makassar as a waterfront city has beaches and Spermonde islands, a potential
capital for developing marine tourism. Various articles and research report that
many island-based tourism remains left behind due to lack of adequate
infrastructures. This study aims to assess the availability and adequacy of island
tourism infrastructures of the three islands of Spermonde cluster i.e. Laelae,
Barrang Lompo and Samalona, and what type of infrastructures must be
provided immediately to attract tourist to visit the islands. The assessment was
done by tourists who were being in the each island; they were selected
accidentally. The questionnaire as assessment instrument was applied to assess
and to score the availability of 25 kinds of infrastructures. The findings show that
the three islands were very attractive as island tourism destination; however, the
availability of infrastructures was in poor condition. FGD of stakeholders have
identified and recommended many kinds of infrastructures to build soon in order
to attract more tourist to visit.
Keywords: islands infrastructure, Laelae-Barrang Lompo-Samalona, Makassar
island tourism

I. Introduction
I.1. Background of Study
Indonesia is the largest archipelago in the world, which has more than 18,110
islands with a coastline of 108,000 km. Referring to the Convention on the Law of
the Sea (UNCLOS) of 1982, Indonesia has sovereignty over the territorial waters of
an area of 3.2 million km2 consisting of archipelagic waters covering an area of 2.9
million km2 and territorial sea area of 0.3 million km2. In addition, [1], [2], [3], [4]
Indonesia also has the exclusive right to exploit marine resources and interests
related area of 2.7 km2 in the waters of the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) which
up to 200 miles from the baselines.
Makassar with a population of nearly 1.5 million people plays a role as the
National Development Center (Pusat Kegiatan National) according to Law 26/2007
on Spatial Planning. Based on Government Regulation 55/2012 on Mamminasata,
Makassar also has been decreed a the growth center of Mamminasata metropolitan,
a conurbation of four regencies namely Makassar, Sungguminasa, Maros, and
Takalar. Consequently, this has accelerated the development of the Makassar city,
which is recently more concentrated on the coastal area. Considering islands,
coastal, and waters area are vulnerable environment ([5], [6]), therefore a careful
attention to the development in the island tourism must be paid.
Marine tourism sector is the most efficient in the marine economic
development. It might be implemented through the use of objects and attractions
optimally. Various objects and attractions that can be used are natural attractions at
the beach, the diversity of flora and fauna (biodiversity) as marine parks, natural
International Conferences on 15th SENVAR (Sustainable Environmental Architecture) and 2nd AVAN (Asian Vernacular
Architecture Network), Department of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering, Hasanuddin University, Makassar,
November 14-15, 2014

Page | 1

Slamet Trisutomo
Assessment on Makassar Islands Ecotourism:
Cases of Laelae, Barrang Lompo and Samalona Islands

tourism (ecotourism), business tourism, cultural tourism, and sports tourism.


Having beautiful and attractive coastal and islands, they will bring enormous
immediate impact to the income of local communities and local governments.
As a waterfront city, Makassar has 35 km length of coastlines from
Barombong on the south side to Biringkanaya in the north side. While in the waters
area, Makassar has Spermonde islands, a cluster of islands that consists of 11 of
islands. These natural resources are very potential that can be developed to
become a island tourism.
Ecotourism. [7], [8] The term is derived from the words ecosystem and
tourism. It is ecosystem-based tour or tours. Often, it is called green tourism,
natural attractions, green tourism or sustainable tourism. As the principle or pillars
of sustainable development, ecotourism is a tour based on the balance between the
elements of ecosystem sustainability, social welfare, and economic development. In
the context of this study, ecotourism is tourism activities those based on the
balance of human, economic, and environment.
It is a fact that ecotourism in developing countries are currently undeveloped.
It is believed, this inability is caused by a lack of infrastructure of the island ([9],
[10], [11], [12]). For this reason, this research interested in conducting investigation
how far the level of availability of infrastructure in main islands in the cluster of
Spermonde of Makassar and what the infrastructures are need to accelerate the
ecotourism.
I.2. Research Problems
This research is address to assess the availability of infrastructures in three
islands i.e. Laelae, Barrang Lompo, and Samalona. The detail formulation of the
research problems are:
(1) How are the availability and condition of existing infrastructures in each of
these islands?
(2) Based on the existing infrastructures, how tourists assess the infrastructure
availability in these islands?
(3) As realizing the availability of the infrastructures based on the ideas of
stakeholders, what kind infrastructures will be proposed and be built soon in
order to attract more visitors to visit.
I.3. Scope and Limit of Study
Spermonde Islands is a cluster of islands consists of 11 islands. This study
was an assessment of the three islands, the most frequently visited by tourists, ie.
Laelae, Barrang Lompo, and Samalona Island. This research focused on the
availability infrastructures, but excluded the quality of the infrastructures.
II. Literature Review
Tourism. [13] compares several definitions of tourism. Law 9/90 of Tourism
sais that tourism is everything related to travel including business objects and
attractions, businesses and other tourist facilities in the field. WTO stated that
tourism comprises the activity of persons traveling to and staying in places outside
their usual environment for not more than one consecutive year for leisure,
business and other purposes. BPS formulates tourism is a traveling activity of the
departed to return to his or her residence, into a tourist attraction, and the length of
stay is more than 24 hours but less than 6 months, which is not the purpose of
getting a living from the places visited and not a routine trip. From some of these
International Conference on the 15th SENVAR (Sustainable Environmental Architecture) and the 2nd AVAN (Asian
Vernacular Architecture Network , Department of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering, Hasanuddin University,
Makassar, November 14-15, 2014

Page | 2

Slamet Trisutomo
Island Tourism in Makassar: An Assessment on Infrastructures
of Laelae, Barrang Lompo and Samalona Islands

definitions, [13] concluded that tourism is an activity for a place to stay for leisure
within a certain time.
Island ecotourism. [14], [15], [16] write about ecotourism. It is said that the
term ecotourism evolved since the late 80s in response to the reaction to the use of
elements of ecological sustainability principles by tourist activities. Activity-based
recreation natural elements appear together with increased awareness of the
impact of tourism on the environment. Realizing that mass tourism activities
allegedly positive impact on the economy and has a negative impact on the
conservation of nature.
Ecotourism: to see, to do, to buy. [17] suggests that in order to tourists
interested in the sights, the objects should qualify something to see, something to
do, and something to buy. To see, tourist activities there should be an object of
interest to be seen. In the context of island tours, an object that can be seen for
examples enjoy panoramic, waves, white sand, sunset or sunrise, seen underwater
biota. To do is active tourism activities, such as diving, see the coral reefs, fishing,
surfing, boating, fishing and doing activities together local communities. To buy
means tourists while seeing and doing thing activities, they are expected to buy
something, such as souvenirs or food. The conclusion from the principle, to see, to
do and to buy in the context of this study is tourism activities should provide the
infrastructure to do in order to see and to buy as to provide the level of satisfaction
for tourists.
Some researchers have done some preliminary studies that focus on island
tourism. A study titled Coastal Area Development Planning in the Context of
Integrated Economic Zones of Makassar, which was sponsored by Bappedakot
Makassar was done in 2011. This multidisciplinary research includes experts in
spatial planning, marine sociologist, economic regional development, infrastructure
experts, and marine ecologist. The study aims to develop a multi-sector economic
activity planning and plotting where they are located in Makassar area. [18] One of
the conclusions was the need to more intensive development of tourism by utilizing
the natural potential of coastal and islands.
[19] conducted a visual assessment on tourism along the coast of Makassar.
Generally, visual assessment is focused on the panorama from mainland to water
area. Conversely, this research was done to assess the object from water side to
mainland. A group of stakeholders were cruising to assess the 10 interesting objects
along the waterfront of Makassar. Using questionnaires, there are 3 of the 10
objects that qualify as a tourist attraction namely Tanjungbayang, Losari public
space, and Paotere traditional port.
Infrastructure. [11] and [8] write the infrastructure and tourist facilities in the
topic of Evaluation of Tourist Facilities, with the objects in the Great Barrier Reef
pontoon, and evaluating the water tourist facilities. The infrastructures cover the
amount of space and shade facilities, range availability, access to water,
cleanliness, the number of places to sit, equipment for snorkeling and diving, lunch
facilities, underwater observatory, facility safety, capacity of the pontoon.
Meanwhile, [8] in his article entitled Tourism Planning in Saronde in
Gorontalo, suggests that tourist infrastructure means roads, electricity, waste
management, drainage, and telecommunications. Still on infrastructure, [3], [20],
[21], [12], [22] also state that maritime tourism infrastructure must provide and
include transportation from departure and destination points in the island, water
utilization facilities such as boating, bathing, diving, and snorkeling. They also
consider the need for rescue, and island coastal ecosystems such as mangroves,
protective embankment or other construction.
International Conferences on 15th SENVAR (Sustainable Environmental Architecture) and 2nd AVAN (Asian Vernacular
Architecture Network), Department of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering, Hasanuddin University, Makassar,
November 14-15, 2014

Page | 3

Slamet Trisutomo
Assessment on Makassar Islands Ecotourism:
Cases of Laelae, Barrang Lompo and Samalona Islands

Based from previous arguments, it can be deduced that the island


ecotourism infrastructure facilities must be available to serve the tourists activities.
Infrastructure components can be grouped into three namely transport
infrastructure as a means of access to the island, water infrastructure, and the
infrastructure on the island.
Scoring as method of assessment. As a research method based on
assessment or judgment by the respondents, scoring method has been widely
applied in various studies. [23], [20], [24], [25], they have applied the scoring
method in their research. Debate arises because scoring will be very subjective and
highly dependent background of evaluators or assessors. Another thing generated
scoring will provide a complete picture of various subjectivities. Given the success
depends tourist traveler ratings themselves, then use the scoring method of
assessment can be considered as an approach to meet the demands of the users or
consumers. In this study, scoring on all the details of the type of island eco-tourism
infrastructure were done by applying the model Likert interval scale of 0 to 5.
Scores of 0 is given if the infrastructure is not available on the island. When it is
available, scores will range from 1 (very poor), 2 (poor), 3 (pretty), 4 (good), and 5
(excellent).
Referring to the previous references, this research has focused on the
availability and sufficiency of 25 kinds infrastructures as seen in Table 4. The
infrastructures might be categorized into 3 groups. Group transportation
infrastructures to the islands (4 kinds) were jetty or dock, waiting space in the dock,
crossing bridge, and speed boat. Group infrastructures in the islands (14 kinds) i.e.
pedestrian, information board, park or green area, restaurant or coffee shop,
gazebo (a shaded place for sitting), bench for sitting, space for fishing, cottage,
clean water supply, electrical supply, cellular signal, security post, health facilities,
and public toilet. Group waters area infrastructure (7 kinds) i.e. snorkeling facilities
and equipment, diving equipment, baywatch, saving equipment, breakwater,
cleanliness of water, and shower.
III. Research Method
The design of this study is descriptive qualitative and quantitative method. It
was focused on three islands i.e. Laelae, Barranglompo, and Samalona islands.
From visitors who were being in the islands, 63 visitors were selected in Laelae, 46
visitors in Barrang Lompo, and 31 visitors in Samalona; totally 140 visitors were
selected from three islands. Scoring was ranging from 0 to 5; score 0 means the
infrastructure was not available while score 5 means the infrastructure was
available and in excellent condition. Using questionnaires, than visitors scored the
availability of the infrastructures. Collected data than were analyzed to obtain the
descriptive statistic, maximum, minimum, and mean. To identify the required
infrastructures to be built sooner in order to attract more visitors, this research
applied FGD of stakeholders.
IV. Research Findings
IV.1. Overview the Objects of Research
Makassar is the fifth largest city in eastern part of Indonesia. With a
population of 1.4 million, it has mainland area of 177.55 km2. In waters areas,
Makassar has a cluster of names Spermonde, consists of 11 inhabited islands.
Those are Laelae, Samalona, Barrang Caddi, Barrang Lompo, Kodingareng Keke,
Kodingareng Lompo, Bonetambung, Lumulumu, Langkai, Lanjukang. Figure 1 shows
International Conference on the 15th SENVAR (Sustainable Environmental Architecture) and the 2nd AVAN (Asian
Vernacular Architecture Network , Department of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering, Hasanuddin University,
Makassar, November 14-15, 2014

Page | 4

Slamet Trisutomo
Island Tourism in Makassar: An Assessment on Infrastructures
of Laelae, Barrang Lompo and Samalona Islands

the map of Makassar coastal area where the three islands were studied. Figure 2
Laelae island, Figure 3 Barranglompo island and, Figure 4 is Samalona island.
Laelae island, the closest island in term of distance from mainland among the
three, now inhabited by 307 households consists of 1,485 persons which 748 were
men and 737 were women. Barrang Lompo island, the largest island of Spermonde
cluster, was inhabited by 3563 persons consists of 1709 men and 1854 women;
Samalona, the smallest one among the three, inhabited by 82 persons.

Figure 1. Map of Makassar Coastal Area


Source: Google Earth (2013)

Figure 2. Laelae Island


Source: survey 2013

Figure 3. Map of Barrang Lompo and its facilities Figure 4. Laelae Island and its
facilities
Source: survey (2013)

Source: survey (2013)

th

International Conferences on 15 SENVAR (Sustainable Environmental Architecture) and 2nd AVAN (Asian Vernacular
Architecture Network), Department of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering, Hasanuddin University, Makassar,
November 14-15, 2014

Page | 5

Slamet Trisutomo
Assessment on Makassar Islands Ecotourism:
Cases of Laelae, Barrang Lompo and Samalona Islands

To describe the three islands in detail, following are the physical data:
Table 1. Description of Laelae, Barrang Lompo, and Samalona Islands
Distanc
Islands
Area
Coordinate Positions
e*
11,6 WL 119o2330 and LS
1 Laelae
1,2 km
ha 5o0824
Barrang
19,2 WL 119o1948 and LS
12,77
2
Lompo
ha 5o0248
km
WL 119o2036,2 and LS
3 Samalona
2,3 ha
6,8 km
05o0730,4

Times**
15 mnts
90 mnts
90 mnts

*from coastal of mainland (km)


** estimate times (minutes) to travel by speed boat from Makassar downtown to each island (minutes)

IV.2. Visitors as Assessors


In this research, assessment on the availability and sufficiency of existing
infrastructures in three islands were done by visitors. They were found and selected
accidentally Following table describes the proportion of selected respondents who
acted as the assessors to score the infrastructures:
Table 2. Characteristics of Respondents as Assessors
N
Description
Number and % respondents
o
Position when
Laelae island: 63 (45%); Barranglompo island 46
1
respondents were
(32.9%); Samalona island 31 (22.1%); Total 140
interviewed
respondents
Laelae island: young 4 (6.3%); adult 58 (92.1%); senior 1
(1.6%)
Barrang Lompo island: young 7 (15.2%); adult 38
2
Age
(82.6%); senior 1 (2.2%)
Samalona island: young 1 (3.2%); adult 29 (93.5%);
senior 1 (3.2%)
Laelae island: men 18 (28.6%); women 45 (71.4%)
Barrang Lompo island: men 13 (28.3%); Women (33
3
Sex
(71.7%)
Samalona island: men 13 (41.9%); women 18 (58.1%)
Laelae island: high school 62 (98.4%); graduate 1 (1.6%)
Barranglompo island: high school 24 (52.2%); graduate
4
Education
22 (47.8%)
Samalona island: high school 23 (74.2%); graduate
(25.8%)
Laelae island: related to 0 (0%); not related to 63
(100%)
Occupation related Barranglompo island: related to 7 (15.2%); not related to
5
to tourism
39 (84.8%)
Samalona island: related to 1 (3.2%); not related to 30
(96.8%)
6
Frequency of visits Laelae island: first time visit 11 (17.5%); not first time
visit (82.5%)
Barranglompo island: first time visit 24 (52.2%); not first
International Conference on the 15th SENVAR (Sustainable Environmental Architecture) and the 2nd AVAN (Asian
Vernacular Architecture Network , Department of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering, Hasanuddin University,
Makassar, November 14-15, 2014

Page | 6

Slamet Trisutomo
Island Tourism in Makassar: An Assessment on Infrastructures
of Laelae, Barrang Lompo and Samalona Islands

N
o

Description

Duration of visit in
the island

Need to overnight
stay

Interesting area

Number and % respondents


time visit 22 (47.8%)
Samalona island: fisrt time visit 6 (19.4%); not first time
visit 25 (80.6%)
Laelae island: 2 jam 27 (42.9%); > 2 jam 36 (57.1%)
Barranglompo island: 2 jam 24 (52.2%); >2 jam 22
(47.8%)
Samalona island: 2 jam 10 (43.6%); >2 jam 21 (67.7%)
Laelae island: yes 25 (39.7%); no 38 (60.3%)
Barranglompo island: yes 22 (47.8%); no 24 (52.2%)
Samalona island: yes 19 (61.3%); no12 (38.7%)
Laelae island: water area 7 (11.1%); beach 56 (88.9%)
Barranglompo island: water area 26 (56.5%); beach 20
(43.5%)
Samalona island: water area 17 (54.8%); beach 14
(45.2%)

Source: survey 2013

IV.3. Availability of Infrastructure


Availability ecotourism on the island were measured by 27 types of
infrastructure, divided into three groups. Group infrastructures related to
transportation, comprising four kind i.e. speed boat as carrier from and to islands
destination, the pier, a bridge from the pier to the area. Infrastructure in the island
group includes 14 types i.e. pedestrians, information boards, parks, restaurants /
cafes, gazebo, bench by the beach, fishing, lodge accommodation, clean water,
electricity, cellular signaling, security stations, health facilities, and public toilets.
Infrastructure in the water area includes seven types of facilities snorkeling i.e.
diving facilities, baywatch, safety equipment, construction of coastal protection,
clean water, and shower. The availability of infrastructures in each island are shown
in the following table:
Table 3. List of Infrastructure Availability in the Islands
Islands
Types of Infrastructures
Laelae
Barrang Lompo
1
For accessing to
All
All
island destinations: infrastructures
infrastructures
4 types
are available
are available
2
Infrastructures
Not available:
Not available:
inside the islands:
information
park,
14 types
board, park,
restaurant,
benches,
gazebo
cottages, public
public toilet
toilet
3
Infrastructures for
Not available:
Not available:
sport and
security guard,
diving facilities,
recreation in the
shower
bay watch , live
water area: 7
fest, shower
types

Samalona
All infrastructures
are available
Not available:
pedestrian, park,
beach security
post, public toilet
Not available; bay
watch, live fest,
shower

Source: survey 2013

IV.4. Scoring Assessment Results


International Conferences on 15th SENVAR (Sustainable Environmental Architecture) and 2nd AVAN (Asian Vernacular
Architecture Network), Department of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering, Hasanuddin University, Makassar,
November 14-15, 2014

Page | 7

Slamet Trisutomo
Assessment on Makassar Islands Ecotourism:
Cases of Laelae, Barrang Lompo and Samalona Islands

Results assessment by visitors on the condition and availability of


infrastructure were shown in Tables 4, 5, and 6. Table 4 describes the average score
of transportation infrastructures that serve visitors from downtown of Makassar to
the islands. Table 5 shows the average score of infrastructures in the island. Table 6
shows the average score of infrastructure that are required when visitor swimming,
bathing, snorkeling and diving. Almost all scores are very low, proving that the
infrastructure is very poor. Score ranges from 1 (very poor) 5 (excellent), while
score 0 means the kind of infrastructure is not available.
Table 4. Average score of infrastructures for transportation
Types of Infrastructures
Laelae
Barrang
Lompo
1
Jetty /dock
2.9
3.2
2
Waiting space
2.7
3.3
3
Bridge connector
2.5
1.8
4
Speed boat
2.8
3.1
Mean of scores
2.73
2.85

Samalona
1.6
1.5
0.5
3.3
1.73

Source: survey 2013

Table 5. Score of infrastructures inside the islands


Types of Infrastructures
Laelae
Barranglomp
o
1
Pedestrian
1.9
3.3
2
Inforamation board
0
1.1
3
Park/ open space
0
0
4
Restaurant, caf
1.7
0
5
Gasebo
3.2
0
6
Bech
0
1.5
7
Fishing platform
2.4
0
8
Cottages,
0
2.7
accomofation
9
Clean water
2.3
3.1
10
Electrical supply
2.5
2.6
11
Cellular signals
3.0
3.4
12
Security post
0.7
1.9
13
Health facilities
2.6
3.6
14
Public toilets
0
0
Mean of the score
1.45
1.66

Samalona
0
1.9
0
2.7
3.3
2.8
1.9
3.7
2.1
2.2
2.8
0
0
2.1
1.82

Note: 0 means the infrastructure not available


Source: survey 2013

Table 6. Score of Infrastructures for Recreation and Sport


Kinds of infrastructures
Laelae
Barranglom
po
1
Snorkeling facilities
0.4
1.5
2
Diving facilities
0.1
0
3
Baywatch
0
0
4
Guard security
0.2
0
5
Breakwater
2.9
2.3
6
Cleanliness
2.0
2.4
7
Shower
0
0

Samalona
3.1
2.6
0
0
0.9
3.0
0

International Conference on the 15th SENVAR (Sustainable Environmental Architecture) and the 2nd AVAN (Asian
Vernacular Architecture Network , Department of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering, Hasanuddin University,
Makassar, November 14-15, 2014

Page | 8

Slamet Trisutomo
Island Tourism in Makassar: An Assessment on Infrastructures
of Laelae, Barrang Lompo and Samalona Islands

Average Score
Average core in each
island

0.8
1.66

0.89
1.88

1.37
1.64

Source: survey 2013

IV.5. Quantitative Analysis


In case Laelae island infrastructures, from 25 types of infrastructure, the
average score was only 1.66 out of a scale of 1-5. The highest value is gazebo (3.2)
which means it was sufficient for visitors to enjoy the panorama while sitting. The
lowest score (0.1) was diving facilities. The average score for transportation
infrastructure was 2.73, the infrastructure in island was 1.45, and scores for sports
facilities at beach was 0.8. The total average score for Laelae island only is 1.66,
which means at very poor condition. There were 7 kinds of infrastructure not
available, i.e. information board, park, bench, cottages, and public toilets,
baywatch, and shower.
For Barang Lompo island, the highest score is the infrastructure of health
facilities (3.6); others that have high scores (>3) were dock arrival (3.2), waiting
space at the dock (3.3), speed boat (3.1), pedestrian (3.3), clean water supply (3.1),
mobile phone signal (3.4), health facilities (3.6). There were 8 kinds infrastructure
not available i.e. park, restaurant/coffee, gazebo, platform for fishing, public toilet,
baywatch, saving facilities, and shower. Total average score for this island is 1.88
mean that the overall condition of the infrastructures is very poor condition.
For Samalona island, the highest score (3.7) is the availability cottages
(cottages), while the lowest is the crossing bridge (0.5). Other infrastructure that
has score higher than 3 were speed boat (3.3), gazebo (3.3); others were snorkeling
equipments (3.1) and cleanliness of water area (3). Infrastructures that not
available in Samalona are park, security post, healt facilities, baywatch, saving
facilities, and shower. Total average score for Samalona island was 1.64.
Overall, the infrastructure of three islands were very poor condition with
average score less than <3. Comparing the availability and sufficiency of
infrastructure among the three islands, Barrang Lompo was the highest one (1.88),
while Laelae was 1.66) and Samalona 1.64.
Infrastructures plays role in providing satisfaction to the visitors. Realizing
this poor condition, effort should be initiated to improve the infrastructures
conditions. Following section shows the key infrastructures to build soon.
IV.6. Key Infrastructure Needs Analysis
To determine the suitable types of infrastructures, this research applied
needs assessment using focused discussion (FGD) method. A group of stakeholder
who related to island tourism were called; it consisted of tourist operators, staffs
from Tourism Agency of Makassar, and visitors, and some experts in tourism
management; totally 30 participants were gathered. Every kind of infrastructure
was briefed to all FGD participants, and they were pleased to vote whether the kind
of infrastructure were prioritized to build soon. The result shows, for Laelae island,
the higher points were speed boat as transportation (26 points= 86.6%), gazebo
(25 points= 83.3%)and clean water supply (24 points= 80%). It means that speed
boat, gazebo. And clean water, are required and must be provided sooner, based on
the FGD.
Table 7. Result of FGD to choose infrastructure to be built soon
International Conferences on 15th SENVAR (Sustainable Environmental Architecture) and 2nd AVAN (Asian Vernacular
Architecture Network), Department of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering, Hasanuddin University, Makassar,
November 14-15, 2014

Page | 9

Slamet Trisutomo
Assessment on Makassar Islands Ecotourism:
Cases of Laelae, Barrang Lompo and Samalona Islands

No
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7

Infrastructures
Infrastructure related to transportation
Dock for arrival
Waiting space on the dock
Crossing bridge
Speedboat
Infrastructure in the island
Pedestrian
Information board
Park or green area
Restaurant, coffee
Gazebo
Sitting area
Space for fishing
Cottage,
Clean water
Electrical supply
Cellular signal
Security post
Health facilities
Public toilets
Infrastructure for beach activities
Snorkeling facilities
Diving facilities
Baywatch
Save equipment
Break water
Cleanliness
Shower

Voted by
stakeholders

21
2
18
26

70
6.6
60
86.6

5
6
17
19
25
21
15
10
24
13
19
11
5
16

16.6
20
56.6
63.3
83.3
70
50
33.3
80
43.3
63.3
36.6
16.6
53.3

5
6
14
12
4
22
15

16.6
20
46.6
40
13.3
73.3
50

Source: FGD October 2013

V. CONCLUSION
This study aims to (1) describe the potential and condition of infrastructure
on the islands Laelae, Barranglompo, and Samalona, (2) to evaluate the availability
of infrastructures, and (3) to determine the needs and desires of tourists
infrastructures based on their assessment. Conclusion results of the study are:
(1) Besides as fishermen settlements, Laelae, Barranglompo, and Samalona
islands now also becoming attractive islands tourist destination in Makassar.
Due to the limitations of infrastructures especially the accommodation,
residents also offer their home as accommodations for visitors.
(2) Availability of infrastructures. In terms of availability of 25 infrastructures,
Barrang Lompo is better than the two others, although the quality remains in
very poor condition, based on the assessment by visitors.
(3) Stakeholders consist of visitors, tourism operators, and staffs of Tourism
Agency, using FGD method; together they have identified and formulated
many infrastructures that required to be built soon in order to attract more
visitors to visit. Related to transportation, comfortable and save speed boat
and bridge that links dock island, are required; related to infrastructure
inside the island, gazebo and electrical power are very important; in terms of
International Conference on the 15th SENVAR (Sustainable Environmental Architecture) and the 2nd AVAN (Asian
Vernacular Architecture Network , Department of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering, Hasanuddin University,
Makassar, November 14-15, 2014

P a g e | 10

Slamet Trisutomo
Island Tourism in Makassar: An Assessment on Infrastructures
of Laelae, Barrang Lompo and Samalona Islands

facilities on waters area, cleanliness of waters and save guard are needed
soon.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This research was funded by the BOPTN Program 2013. My great appreciation
goes to the staffs of Makassar Tourism Agency for supporting the valuable data.
Thanks also address to students of PWK who collected data from the islands and
preparing the figures.
REFERENCES
[1]Tuwo, Ambo. 2011. Pengelolaan Ekowisata Pesisir dan Laut. Brilian Internasional.
Surabaya
[2]Rais, Jacub dkk. 2004. Menata Ruang Laut Terpadu. Pradnya Paramita. Jakarta
[3]Dahuri, Rokhmin dkk. 2004. Pengelolaan Sumber Daya Wilayah Pesisir dan
Lautan Secara Terpadu. Pradnya Paramita. Jakarta
[4]Setiawan, Johan. 2012. Kepariwisataan Alam dan Perubahan Iklim Studi Kasus di
Taman Nasional Tanjung Putting Kalimantan Tengah. Jurnal Nasional Pariwisata
Vol. 4 No 1, April 2012 (iv-x).
[5]Sari, Suzanna Ratih; and Darwawan, Edy. 2008. Coastal Area of Ujungnegoro
Batang Regency. In Journal of Coastal Development, pp. 43-51 Vol. 9 No. 1
Oktober 2008
[6]Tahir, A. et al. 2009. Indeks Kerentanan Pulau-Pulau Kecil: Kasus Pulau Barang
Lompo-Makasar. in Ilmu Kelautan, pp. 8-13, Vol. 14 (4).
[7]Moscardo, G. 1998. Interpretation and Sustainable Tourism: Fuctions, Examples
and Principles. in the Journal of Tourism Studies, pp. 2-13, Vol. 9, No. 1
[8]Mas, Sitti Rokhina. 2009. Perencanaan Obyek Wisata Saronde sebagai Tujuan di
Kabupaten Gorontalo. Jurna Inovasi Vol 6/4 DEsember 2009.
[9]Hay Pete. 2006. A Phenomenology of Islands. Islands Studies Journal, Vol. 1, No.
1, 2006, pp. 19-42.
[10]Kim, S.G. and Kim, Y.J.E. 1996. Overview of Coastal and Marine Tourism in Korea.
in the Journal of Tourism Studies, pp. 46-53, Vol. 7, No. 2.
[11]Moscardo, Gianna. 2001. Visitor Evaluations of Built Tourist Facilities: Pontoons
on the Great Barrier Reef. The Journal of Tourism Studies Vol. 12, No. 1, May
01.
[12] Hadwen, Wade L dkk. 2003. The Significance and Management Implications of
Perched Dune Lakes as Swimming and Recreation Sites on Fraser Island,
Australia. The Journal of Tourism Studies Vol. 14, No. 2, Dec 03.
[13]Gunawan, Myra P. 2007. Leassure, Rekreasi, Pariwisata dalam Berbagai Dimensi
Metropolitan. Dalam Jurnal Perencanaan Wilayah dan Kota Vol. 18 No. 1 April
2007 hal. 49-64.
[14]Diamantis, Dimitrios dkk. 1999. The Links Between Sustainable Tourism and
Ecotourism: A definitional and operational perspective. The Journal of Tourism
Studies Vol. 10, No. 2, Dec 99.
[15] Hay Pete. 2006. A Phenomenology of Islands. Islands Studies Journal, Vol. 1,
No. 1, 2006, pp. 19-42.
[16]Ding, Peiyi. 1995. Environmental Audits: An Emerging Concept in Suistainable
[17]Yoeti, Oka A. 2008. Perencanaan dan Pengeebangan Pariwisata. PT. Prajna
Paramita, Jakarta.

International Conferences on 15th SENVAR (Sustainable Environmental Architecture) and 2nd AVAN (Asian Vernacular
Architecture Network), Department of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering, Hasanuddin University, Makassar,
November 14-15, 2014

P a g e | 11

Slamet Trisutomo
Assessment on Makassar Islands Ecotourism:
Cases of Laelae, Barrang Lompo and Samalona Islands

[18]Bappedakot Makassar. 2011. Pengembangan Kawasan Pesisir dalam Rangka


Perencanaan Kawasan Ekonomi Terpadu Kota Makassar. Laporan Penelitian
APBD 2011. Beppedakot, Makassar
[19]Trisutomo, Slamet, dkk. 2012. Assesmen Visual Wisata Susur Pantai Kota
Makassar Menuju Pengembangan Zonasi Kawasan Wisata Bahari. Tidak
Diterbitkan.
[20]Blackman, Anna dkk. 2004. Factors Contributing to successful Tourism
Development in Peripheral Regions. The Journal of Tourism Studies Vol. 15, No.
1, May 04.
[21]Timothy, Dallen J dkk. 1995 . Tourist Accomodation in An Asian Jistoric City. The
Journal of Tourism Studies Vol. 6, No. 2, Dec 95
[22]Fagence, Michael. 1997. Ecotourism and Pacific Island Countries: The First
Generation of Strategies. The Journal of Tourism Studies Vol. 8, No. 2, Dec. 97.
[23]Morrison, Alastair M. 2003. Comparative Profiles of Travellers on Cruises and
Land-Based Resort Vacations. The Journal Of Tourism Studies Vol. 14, No. 1,
May 03.
[24]Noussia, Antonio. 1998. Framing Experience: Visual Interpretation and Space
Open Air Museums. The Journal of Tourism Studies Vol. 9, No. 2, Dec 98.
[25]Ciftci, Cigdem Ciftci. 2010. A Visual Assessment for Land Use Analysis at the
Coastal Area of Beysehir Lake. BALWOIS 2010 - Ohrid, Republic of Macedonia 25,
29
May 2010

International Conference on the 15th SENVAR (Sustainable Environmental Architecture) and the 2nd AVAN (Asian
Vernacular Architecture Network , Department of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering, Hasanuddin University,
Makassar, November 14-15, 2014

P a g e | 12