COST ANALYSIS FOR REDUCING TRAFFIC JAM IN ... - UIN Repository [PDF]

COST ANALYSIS FOR REDUCING TRAFFIC JAM IN CAMPUS (Study Case: UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta)

Submitted by: Kurniaddin Mahmud 108081100002

DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT INTERNATIONAL-CLASS PROGRAM FACULTY OF ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY SYARIF HIDAYATULLAH JAKARTA 2013 AD/1434 AH

Bachelor thesis under the title COST ANALYSIS FOR REDUCING TRAFFIC JAM IN CAMPUS (Study Case: UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta) arranged as one of requirements to attain bachelor degree in Faculty of Economics and Business, State Islamic University Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta.

Submitted by Kurniaddin Mahmud NIM: 108081100002

is approved by Department of Management, International Class Program, Faculty of Economics and Business, UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta under the supervisory of: Supervisor I

Supervisor II

Prof. Dr. Margareth Gfrerer

Amalia, SE, MSM ID. 197408212009012005

DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT INTERNATIONAL CLASS PROGRAM FACULTY OF ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS STATE ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY SYARIF HIDAYATULLAH JAKARTA 2013 AD/1434 AH i

CERTIFICATION OF COMPREHENSIVE EXAM SHEET

On this day, Friday, March 23, 2012, a Comprehensive Examination has been conducted to student: 1. Name

: Kurniaddin Mahmud

2. Student Number

: 108081100002

3. Department

: Management (International Program)

4. Thesis Title

: ―COST ANALYSIS FOR REDUCING

TRAFFIC JAM IN CAMPUS (Case Study: UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta)‖

By considering the evaluation result of the student during examination, it is decided that the student has passed the Comprehensive Examination and is given opportunity to work for thesis as one of requirements for acquiring the Bachelor of Economics title from the Department of Management, Faculty of Economics and Business, Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University Jakarta.

Jakarta, March 23, 2012

Prof. Dr. Abdul Hamid, MS ID. 19570617198503.1.002

(_________________________) Examiner I

Arief Mufraini, Lc., M.Si. ID. 19770122200312.1.000

(__________________________) Examiner II

Dr. Yahya Hamja, MM ID. 194906021978031001

(___________________________) Examiner III ii

CERTIFICATION OF THESIS DEFENCE EXAM SHEET On this day, Thursday, June 27, 2013, a Thesis Defense Examination has been conducted to student: 1. Name

: Kurniaddin Mahmud

2. Student Number

: 108081100002

3. Department

: Management (International Program)

4. Thesis Title : ―COST ANALYSIS FOR REDUCING TRAFFIC JAM IN CAMPUS (Case Study: UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta)‖ By considering the evaluation result of the student during examination, it is decided that the student has passed the Thesis Defence Examination and the thesis is accepted as one of requirements for acquiring the Bachelor of Economics title from the Department of Management, Faculty of Economics and Business, Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University Jakarta.

Jakarta, June 27, 2013

Leis Suzanawaty, SE, M.Si. ID. 197208092005012004

(_________________________) Chairman

Dr. Ahmad Dumyathi Bashori, MA ID. 19700106200312001

(__________________________) Secretary

Cut Erika A.F., SE, MBA

(___________________________) Expert Examiner

Prof. Dr. Margareth Gfrerer

(_________________________) Supervisor I

A m a l i a, S E, MSM ID. 197408212009012005

(_________________________) Supervisor II iii

STATEMENT OF THESIS ORIGINALITY

This is to state that, on behalf of myself: NAME

: KURNIADDIN MAHMUD

ID NUMBER

: 108081100002

FACULTY

: Economics and Business (FEB)

MAJOR

: Management (International Program)

I hereby declare that, in writing this thesis, I: 1. Did not use other people’s ideas, unless by such a development and am responsible for it. 2. Did not infringe upon anyone’s copyright. 3. Did not derive other people’s work, unless by attaching the original resource or under the permission of the author. 4. Did not manipulate and fake the data. 5. Am the sole author of this thesis and that no part of this thesis has been published or submitted for publication.

I certify that if at a later date there is any claim from other party on my work, and it has been proven by accountable evidence, found that i have infringed the statement above, I would not mind of being sanctioned under the rules running in the Faculty of Economics and Business UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta. Accordingly, this statement was sincerely made. Jakarta, February 12, 2013 Author Kurniaddin Mahmud iv

CURRICULUM VITAE

Name

: Kurniaddin Mahmud

Place, date of birth

: Purworejo, 2nd January 1990

Address

: Jalan Gunung Rinjani Raya Blok GA 9 No. 5 Villa Tangerang Indah, Gebang Raya, Periuk, Kota Tangerang 15132 – Banten

E-mail

: [email protected], [email protected],

Facebook & Twitter : Caesar Asadullah Cell phone

: 0813 9901 3625

Educational Background: 1. TK Islam Baidaul Ahkam, year 1995-1996, Kel. Gebang Raya, Kec. Jatiuwung, Kodya Tangerang 2. SDN Gebang Raya I, year 1996-2002, Kel. Gebang Raya, Kec. Periuk, Kota Tangerang 3. Ma‘had (MTs & MA) Darul Arqam Muhammadiyah Daerah Garut, year 2002-2008, Desa Cimaragas, Kec. Cilawu, Kab. Garut 4. UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta, International Class Program, Faculty of Economics and Business, year 2008-now Informal Courses: 1. Practical English Centre (PEC), year 2001-2002 2. Arabic Course, Language Center Ma‘had Darul Arqam Muhammadiyah Daerah Garut, year 2002-2003 3. English Course, Language Center Ma‘had Darul Arqam Muhammadiyah Daerah Garut, year 2003-2004 4. Computer Course (Microsoft Office), Laboratorium Komputer Ma‘had Darul Arqam Muhammadiyah Daerah Garut, year 2003-2004 5. In-Service Training by PUSKADIABUMA in cooperation with Denmark Embassy, Ponpes Cipasung, Tasikmalaya, year 2007 6. Campus of Marketing Club (CMC), MarkPlus, year 2011-2012

v

Organizational Experiences: 1. Staff of LPKWU (Lembaga Peningkatan Kewirausahaan) Pimpinan Ranting Ikatan Remaja Muhammadiyah Darul Arqam Garut, year 20022003 2. Staff of KPSDM (Kaderisasi Pengembangan Sumber Daya Manusia) Pimpinan Ranting Ikatan Remaja Muhammadiyah Darul Arqam Garut, year 2003-2004 3. Staff of KPSDM (Kaderisasi Pengembangan Sumber Daya Manusia) Pimpinan Ranting Ikatan Remaja Muhammadiyah Darul Arqam Garut, year 2004-2005 4. Staff of KPSDM (Kaderisasi Pengembangan Sumber Daya Manusia) Pimpinan Ranting Ikatan Remaja Muhammadiyah Darul Arqam Putra Garut, year 2005-2006 5. Chief of Korps Muballigh Remaja Pimpinan Ranting Ikatan Remaja Muhammadiyah Darul Arqam Putra Garut, year 2005-2006 6. Chairman of Pimpinan Ranting Ikatan Remaja Muhammadiyah Darul Arqam Putra Garut, year 2006-2007 7. General Treasurer of Asrama Mahasiswa UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta, year 2008-2009 8. Chief of Bidang Pengkaderan dan Organisasi Pimpinan Komisariat Ekonomi dan Ilmu Sosial IMM (Ikatan Mahasiswa Muhammadiyah) Cabang Ciputat, year 2009-2010 9. Chief of Bidang Organisasi Pimpinan Komisariat Ekonomi dan Ilmu Sosial IMM (Ikatan Mahasiswa Muhammadiyah) Cabang Ciputat, year 2010-2011 10. Staff of LSO Bahasa BEM Jurusan Manajemen FEB (Faculty of Economics and Business) UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta, year 20102011 11. Presidium III Himpunan Mahasiswa Program Kelas Internasional FEB UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta, year 2008 12. PISCOM (Piety Student Community), year 2011-2012. Other experiences: 1. Teaching-team of TPA Al-Istiqomah, Villa Tangerang Indah, Kota Tangerang 2. Marketing team of Koperasi Lestari Handy Craft, Cempaka Putih, Ciputat Timur, Tangerang Selatan, July 2011-July 2012. vi

3. Ambassador of GRLI (Globally Responsible Leadership Initiative), PACSR, year 2011 4. Speaker in Seminar Kewirausahaan organized by KKN (Kuliah Kerja Nyata) group of students of UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta, Kec. Cibadak, Sukabumi, year 2011 5. Pencak Silat Athlete Delegation from Perguruan Sinar Pusaka Putra Garut, Kejuaran PPSI Kabupaten Garut, year 2008 6. Athlete Delegation from Tapak Suci Putera Muhammadiyah Daerah Garut for Kejuaraan Wilayah Tapak Suci Putera Muhammadiyah year 2008 in Bekasi, Jawa Barat. 7. Committee chief of Green Campus UIN Jakarta 2012 event, March-May 2012. 8. Teacher and headmaster of PKBM Lestari, Kampung Utan, Ciputat, Tangerang Selatan, January-July 2012. 9. Staff of TITA (Turkish-Indonesian Trade Association), March 2013.

vii

ABSTRACT The campus of UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta is frequented by thousands of people comprising students, lecturers, and others every day. Many of them arrive at the campus by motorcycle. Paths at the campus are jammed by motorcycles. Emergency cars could hardly pass. The space for pedestrian is limited. The air and noise impact the people in campus. This study has been initiated to find out the needs that the campus could become more environmental friendly. The objective of this research is to contribute to the Green Campus program by considering the possibility of initiating ‗Bike-inUniversity‘ and vegetation program. This research analyzes the preconditions of the implementation of the Green Campus program by targeting the students and their mobility behaviors to and from the campus, from economics perspective. This research was firstly presuming that the reasons why students prefer to choose motorcycle or cars instead of bicycle or walking on foot are relating to economic aspects, the distance, the duration of the travel, and the status or lifestyle. Finally, as the expected result, this projected program may effectively reduces the traffic jam, as well as reduces pollution, inside the university area by moving the parking area into special parking building outside the campus, or/and building dormitories for the students currently using motorcycle to Campus, and may implies to long term benefit for the university and also the academic community in the campus. Keywords: traffic jam, parking building, dormitories, costs.

viii

ABSTRAK Kampus UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta sering dikunjungi oleh ribuan orang yang terdiri dari mahasiswa, dosen, dan lain-lain setiap hari. Banyak dari mereka datang ke kampus dengan sepeda motor. Ruas jalan yang ada di dalam kampus penuh sesak oleh sepeda motor. Mobil yang sedang terburu-buru hampir tidak bisa melintas. Ruang untuk pejalan kaki terbatas. Kondisi udara dan kebisingan mempengaruhi orang-orang di kampus. Studi ini dilakukan untuk mengetahui pentingnya kampus menjadi lebih ramah lingkungan. Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk memberikan kontribusi bagi program Green Campus dengan mempertimbangkan kemungkinan untuk mengadakan sepeda kampus dan program penghijauan. Penelitian ini menganalisis prakondisi pelaksanaan program Green Campus dengan menargetkan mahasiswa dan perilaku mobilitas mereka ke dan dari kampus, dari perspektif ekonomi. Penelitian ini pertama sekali menganggap bahwa alasan mengapa mahasissiswa lebih suka memilih sepeda motor atau mobil, ketimbang sepeda atau berjalan kaki, adalah berkaitan dengan aspek ekonomi, jarak, lama perjalanan, dan status atau gaya hidup. Akhirnya, sebagai hasil yang diharapkan, program ini diproyeksikan secara efektif dapat mengurangi kemacetan, juga polusi, di dalam area universitas dengan memindahkan tempat parkir ke gedung parkir khusus di luar kampus, atau/dan membangun asrama bagi para mahasiswa yang menggunakan sepeda motor ke kampus, dan diharapkan pula dapat berimplikasi pada manfaat jangka panjang bagi universitas dan juga komunitas akademis di kampus. Kata kunci: kemacetan, gedung parkir, asrama, biaya.

ix

FOREWORDS

All praise be to Allah, The Most Glorious and The Most Mercifull, after passing long time period by hard work and support of almost all people around the author, this thesis is finally finished.

This research try to identify the mapping of transportation modality of UIN Jakarta‘s students and its economics impacts. Hopefully, it could contribute to the development of the Campus in the future.

The author is very gratefull to parties as the following, including those who are not mentioned person per person. The author thanks to: 1.

Allah SWT, who always makes the author enjoys the activities, meet the author with kind people, and make all the ways easy to pass. Alhamdu lillaahi Rabbi Al-‗Aalamiin. All praise be to Him, The Essence.

2.

Rasulullah SAW who always inspires the author with his entire example.

3.

Lovely parents who never stop to pray for the author‘s success; ustadzs and ustadzahs, teachers, and lecturers who had supplied the author by all beneficial knowledge for worldly life and hereafter.

4.

The supervisors: Prof. Dr. Margareth Maria Anna Gfrerer (Mom Margareth), Ibu Amalia, SE, MSM (Bu Amel), who have been patient in guiding the author in the work for this thesis.

5.

Technical Coordinator of International Class Program, Pak Arief Mufraini; also his secretary, Ustadz Ahmad Dumyati Bashori; the very kind staff, Bang Sugih Waluya R.

6.

Stijn Van Mol, Fauziyah Hasanah, Rabiatul Aulia, Asrina, and all the Green Campus Team who have made a lot of impressive things along this research.

7.

Rindana Intan Emelia, who had helped a lot in disseminating the questionnaire online. x

8.

LDK Syahid who had provided support and link to disseminate the questionnaire.

9.

Abiler in EDUCARE, Dhersane Pepaya and PISCOM, dhersane‘s imam, Uray Noviandy Taslim, and other jama‘ats of dhersane Pepaya: Al Akhzar, Faza, Aa Sulaiman, and especially M. Irhamni Abdul Latief who had delivered help in disseminating the questionnaires.

10. Classmates (batchmates: Fitoy, Gugun, Afiew, Rian, Eko, Mia, Sita, Vivin, Berly, Angga, Royan, Abhi, Rizky, Shinta, Farah, Lucky, Novita), seniors, juniors and all the students of International Program who have prayed for the finishing of this thesis. 11. All people who supported the author by all facilities, who cannot be mentioned one by one, by the author.

The author realized that there must be any imperfection within this research, due to the limitation of the author, eihter in the term of knowledge or ability. Therefore, it is an honor for the author to have any suggestion from anyone to do such improvement and development. Expectedly, there would be any further research in the same field to develop related theme.

Jakarta, February 11, 2013

Kurniaddin Mahmud

xi

TABLE OF CONTENT

Cover Thesis Approval Sheet ..................................................................................

i

Certification of Comprehensive Exam Sheet .............................................

ii

Certification of Thesis Defence Exam Sheet ............................................... iii Statement of Thesis Originality ................................................................... iv Curriculum Vitae ..........................................................................................

v

Abstract .. ....................................................................................................... viii Abstrak ........................................................................................................... ix Forewords .......................................................................................................

x

Table of Content ............................................................................................ xii List of Table ................................................................................................... xv List of Figure ................................................................................................. xx List of Appendix ............................................................................................ xxii CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION ............................................................

1

A. Background ..............................................................................

1

B. Research Question ...................................................................

7

C. Research Objective and Research Benefit ...............................

7

1. Research Objective ...........................................................

7

2. Research Benefit ...............................................................

8

LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................

9

A. Theories Related .....................................................................

9

1. Costs ...................................................................................

9

2. Benefit .................................................................................

11

3. Cost-Benefit Analysis .........................................................

13

4. Green Campus .....................................................................

15

B. Previous Research ...................................................................

18

C. Logical Framework .................................................................

19

CHAPTER II

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ................................. xii

21

A. Scope of Research ...................................................................

21

B. Sampling Method ....................................................................

22

1. Population ...........................................................................

22

2. Sample ................................................................................

23

3. Sample Size ........................................................................

24

C. Data Collection Technique ......................................................

25

D. Data Analysis Technique ........................................................

28

1. Data Reduction ...................................................................

28

2. Data Display .......................................................................

29

3. Conclusion Drawing ...........................................................

29

E. Research Instrument ................................................................

31

F. Operational Variable ...............................................................

33

CHAPTER IV

FINDING AND ANALYSIS .........................................

37

A. Finding .....................................................................................

37

B. Analysis ...................................................................................

46

1. Motorcycle ..........................................................................

51

2. Public Transportation ..........................................................

52

3. Bicycle ................................................................................

53

4. On Foot ...............................................................................

58

5. Car .......................................................................................

59

6. Other ...................................................................................

61

7. Maintenance ........................................................................

65

C. Evaluation and Interpretation ..................................................

79

1. Recapitulation of Time Consumed and Cost Spent by Respondents ........................................................................

79

2. Total Cost and Total Time Spent during the 4 Years of Study 80 3. Opportunity Lost of Respondents .......................................

81

D. Suggested Alternative Solution ................................................

82

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATION ........................... 100

A. Conclusion ............................................................................... 100 xiii

B. Implication ................................................................................ 102 C. Recommendation ..................................................................... 104 REFERENCES .............................................................................................. 106 APPENDICES ............................................................................................... 113

xiv

LIST OF TABLE

Number

Table 2.1

Description

Page

Previous Research Conducted in UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta‘s Campus

18

Comparison of Probability Sampling and Non-probability Sampling

23

Determination of Sample Size from a Certain Population with Standard Error of 1%, 5%, and 10%

24

Table 3.3

Measurement Levels

27

Table 3.4

The variables, subvariables, and indicators of green campus according to Dr. Arif Zulkifli Nasution

33

The variables, subvariables, and indicators of green campus (UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta case)

35

Table 4.1

Transportation Choice of Respondents

37

Table 4.2

Reason of Respondents in Choosing Their Means of Transport

37

Willingness of Respondents to Take Public Transportation if Public Transportation is Cheaper

38

Willingness of Respondents to Take Public Transportation if Public Transportation is Faster

38

Table 4.5

Respondents Maintenance on Their Means of Transport

39

Table 4.5a1

Vehicle Component Maintained by Respondents

39

Table 4.5b1

Respondents Reason of Maintaining Their Vehicles

39

Table 4.5c1

Respondents‘ Transportation Cost per Year

40

Table 4.5a2

Reason for Not Maintaining

40

Table 4.6

Refueling Habit of Respondents

40

Table 4.7

Distance to Campus Beaten by Respondents

41

Table 3.1

Table 3.2

Table 3.5

Table 4.3

Table 4.4

xv

Respondents‘ Travel Time to Campus, Including Traffic Jam

41

Respondents‘ Travel Time to Campus, Ignoring Traffic Jam

42

Table 4.10

Respondents‘ Attendance Frequency to Campus

42

Table 4.11

Motorcycle Ownership of Respondents‘ Family

42

Table 4.12

Car Ownership of Respondents‘ Family

43

Table 4.13

Respondents Opinion on Biking (Transporting by Bike) to Campus

43

Table 4.14

Respondents Opinion on Biking at (inside) Campus

43

Table 4.15

Respondents‘ Transportation Cost per Week

44

Table 4.16

Respondents Opinion on Car-Free Campus

44

Table 4.17

Respondents Opinion on Motorcycle-Free Campus

45

Table 4.18

Respondents Opinion on New Garden Provision in Campus

45

Respondents Opinion on Provision of More Vegetation in Campus

45

Table 4.20

Transportation-Modality Mapping

46

Table 4.21

The Dominant Reason of Respondents in Choosing Means of Transport

47

Table 4.22

Reasons Mapping on Transportation Choice

47

Table 4.23

Reason of Motorcycle Users

51

Table 4.24

Respondents Reason of Using Public Transportation

52

Table 4.25

Respondents Reason of Using Bicycle

53

Table 4.26

Comparison between Motorcycle Speed and Bicycle Speed

54

Table 4.27

The Speed of Car and Public Transportation

55

Table 4.28

Speed of Walking ―on Foot‖ and ―Other‖ Transportation Means

56

Table 4.8

Table 4.9

Table 4.19

xvi

Table 4.29

Recapitulation of Relative Speed

57

Table 4.30

Recapitulation of Relative Speed, Sequenced from the Fastest to the Slowest

57

Table 4.31

Respondents Reason of Walking on Foot

58

Table 4.32

Average Distance Taken by Each Transportation Means

59

Table 4.33

Respondents Reason of Using Their Car

59

Table 4.34

Recapitulation of Relative Speed, Sequenced from the Fastest to the Slowest

60

Table 4.35

Reason of Those Taking Other Transportation Means

61

Table 4.36

Description of Those Taking Other Transportation

61

Table 4.37

Transportation Cost per Week of Those Taking Other Transportation

63

Table 4.38

Willingness to Take Public Transportation

63

Table 4.39

Comparison between Tendency Take Public Transportation if It is Cheaper and if It is Faster

64

Specific Overview of Respondents Who Maintains and Don‘t Maintain Their Vehicles

65

Table 4.41

Average Annual Maintenance Cost

66

Table 4.42

Average Distance Taken by Respondents

66

Table 4.43

Respondents‘ Average Travel Time if Traffic-Jam Time is Included

66

Table 4.40

Table 4.44

Respondents‘ Average Travel Time, Including & Ignoring Traffic-Jam Time, and Average Time Spent Amid Traffic Jam 67

Table 4.45

Average of Respondents‘ Attendance Frequency to Campus

67

Time-Consumed Comparison between Motorcycle and Car in Reaching The Campus

69

Respondents Family Ownership of Motorcycle and Car

71

Table 4.46

Table 4.47

xvii

Table 4.48

Comparison of Respondents Opinion on Bike to and on Bike at Campus

71

Respondents‘ Weighted Average Transportation Cost per Week

72

Detail Elaboration of Each Level of Weekly Transportation Cost

73

Detail Elaboration of Each Level of Weekly Transportation Cost, by Ignoring Those Walking

74

Weighted Average Transportation Cost, Ignoring Those Walking

75

Weighted Average Transportation Cost, Ignoring Those Walking and Those Using Bicycle

75

Summary of Average Costs and Average Time Spent by Respondents

79

Estimated Maintenance, Transportation, Parking Costs Spent by Motorcycle Users

81

Estimated Maintenance, Transportation, Parking Costs Spent by Car Users

81

Table 4.57

Growth of UIN Jakarta‘s Graduates

84

Table 4.58

UIN Jakarta‘s Graduates Growth

85

Table 4.59

UIN Jakarta‘s Graduates Descriptive Statistic Summary, by MS Excel

85

Table 4.60

Forecasted Growth of Graduates from 2013 to 2017

86

Table 4.61

Forecasted Transportation Modality of UIN Jakarta‘s Students in the Highest, Base, and Lowest Possible Case

88

Table 4.62

Type of Vehicle and Parking Space Unit

90

Table 4.63

Forecasted Operational Cost of Parking Building

91

Table 4.64

BI Rate (Based on decision of board meeting), 5th July

Table 4.49

Table 4.50

Table 4.51

Table 4.52

Table 4.53

Table 4.54

Table 4.55

Table 4.56

xviii

2005 to 7th March 2013

92

Payback Period and Discounted Payback Period of Parking Building

94

Table 4.66

Forecasted Operational Cost of Dormitories

96

Table 4.67

Payback Period and Discounted Payback Period of Dormitories

97

Table 4.65

xix

LIST OF FIGURE Number

Description

Page

Figure 1.1

Banner of Bike@Campus ITB

3

Figure 1.2

Announcement Displayed in Bike Shelter of IPB

5

Figure 1.3

Procedures of Bike Borrowing in IPB

5

Figure 1.4

Borrowing Form of IPB‘s Bikes

6

Figure 1.5

Returning Form of IPB‘s Bikes

6

Figure 2.1

Logical Framework

19

Figure 3.1

Illustration of Data Analysis Comprising Data Reduction, Data Display, and Conclusion Drawing

30

Figure 4.1

Trend of Transportation Choice

46

Figure 4.2

Reasons Function to Transportation Means

49

Figure 4.3

Transportation Means Function to Reasons

50

Figure 4.4

Respondents Reasons of Choosing Motorcycle

51

Figure 4.5

Respondent Reason of Using Pablic Transportation

52

Figure 4.6

Respondents Reason of Using Bicycle to Campus

53

Figure 4.7

Respondents Reason of Walking on Foot to Campus

58

Figure 4.8

Respondents Reason of Using Car to Campus

59

Figure 4.9

Comparison between Tendency to Take Public Transportation if It is Cheaper and if It is Faster

64

Figure 4.10

Motorcycle Ownership of Respondents Family

68

Figure 4.11

Car Ownership of Respondents Family

69

Figure 4.12

Respondents Family Ownership of Motorcycle and Car, In Comparison

71

Comparison of Respondents Opinion on Bike to and on Bike at Campus

72

Comparison of Respondents Opinion on Car-Free UIN and Motorcycle-Free UIN

76

Figure 4.13

Figure 4.14

xx

Respondents‘ Opinion on New Gardens Provision in UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta‘s Campus

77

Respondents‘ Opinion on More Vegetations Provision in UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta‘s Campus

78

Figure 4.17

Parking Cost in UIN Jakarta

80

Figure 4.18

Growth of UIN Jakarta‘s Graduates

85

Figure 4.19

The Rough Forecast on the Growth of Total Students in Few Years Later

87

Parking Tariff in UIN Jakarta

92

Figure 4.15

Figure 4.16

Figure 4.20

xxi

LIST OF APPENDIX Number

Appendix 1:

Description

Page

Questionnaire Structure

113

Appendix 2: Result of Questionnaire Dissemination (Absolute and Relative Number), TOTAL

116

Appendix 3: Result of Questionnaire Dissemination (Absolute and Relative Number), Motorcycle

120

Appendix 4: Result of Questionnaire Dissemination (Absolute and Relative Number), Public Transportation

124

Appendix 5: Result of Questionnaire Dissemination (Absolute and Relative Number), Bicycle

128

Appendix 6: Result of Questionnaire Dissemination (Absolute and Relative Number), On Foot

132

Appendix 7: Result of Questionnaire Dissemination (Absolute and Relative Number), Car

136

Appendix 8: Result of Questionnaire Dissemination (Absolute and Relative Number), Other

140

Appendix 9:

144

Grand Mapping

Appendix 10: Observation Photos

152

Appendix 11: Chi Square Table

157

xxii

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION A. Background Year by year, the number of students of State Islamic University (UIN) Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta increases. Based on UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta‘s website,

www.uinjkt.ac.id, accessed on 26th March, 2012,

nowadays, the number of students of UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta has reached 23,000 and in average, there is an annual increase of around 4,000 students. This increase factually implies to the increase of the number of motorized vehicles coming in to and out from the campus of UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta. While, the volume of vehicles brought by the students to the campus gets denser every year, and impacts the paths inside the campus I. Parking areas are extended to the paths, dominantly by motorcycle. Dr. Lily Surayya Eka Putri, M.Env.Stud., et. al. (2011: 32) within Strategi Pengembangan UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta Menuju Eco-Campus revealed, in 2007, total amount of motorcycles (plus cars) coming into campus I UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta is only 1152. Meanwhile, a very surprising number is there in 2011, when the total amount of motorcycles (plus cars) entering the campus I is 3552, which means an increase of 220%. Due to this phenomenon, a cost-benefit analysis will evaluate the economic facts towards university and the students. 1

In preparing the needs-analysis and the following research for the UIN Jakarta‘s Campus, the campuses of University of Indonesia, Agricultural Institute of Bogor, and Technology Institute of Bandung were visited. The field observation at the Campus of University of Indonesia (UI) was scheduled for Friday, 10th February 2012. The implementation of bike-in-campus in UI is well managed. Students are using the bicycle to reach the different faculties and other buildings in the Campus area. It seems the success of the implementation of bike-in-campus is because of the infrastructure: 1) The spacious area and a bit turned from the main street impacts the roadway inside the university is much more quite of cars, motorcycle, and other vehicles. 2) Special lane for bike is available in some areas inside the Campus, and even for some places without any bike lane, because the street is quiet and very few cars and motorcycles passing, the bikers can pass the street easily to reach the destination place. 3) Because the area of the university is very much huge, and taking much more minutes to walk, so then the huge number of students who‘s not having their own vehicles are very much supported with the existence of bikes in campus. The field observation at the Bandung Institute of Technology (ITB), which was scheduled for Wednesday, 15th February 2012. 2

This university started Bike@Campus program on July 10, 2010 with 20 bikes. An upgrading to 90 bikes followed during July to August 2010. In the period of September to December 2010 the program was in the phase of stabilization and consolidation. Figure 1.1 Banner of Bike@Campus ITB

Source: researcher‘s photo collection, captured from the banner displayed in ITB (Bandung Institute of Technology)

At the campus, interviews with some students were conducted. The following points were highlighted: 1) The number of bikes supplied is less than the amount needed, so it doesn‘t fit with the demand at the Campus. As a result, most students choose walking to reach their faculties or other buildings. 2) Some bikes are locked and not useful for students. Walking, as students are saying, is no matter for them because the area of the university is not that spacious so they can reach their destination buildings in not more than 3

5 to 10 minutes from the gate. Besides, walking is much simpler than using a bike for such short distances because there are only two bike shelters inside the university. The time students could save when taking a bicycle is minimal. 3) Due to the fact that most students prefer walking, only a small number of bikes is used. However, the usage is usually only for carrying heavier stuffs, not for daily transport inside the Campus. Some students have admitted to use the bike only for having fun in the break time. The field observation at the Bogor Institute of Agriculture (IPB) was scheduled on Monday, 20th February 2012. In IPB, the officers/keepers of the bike shelter were interviewed. The shelter keepers explained that bikes at the premises of the Campus were launched four years ago, in cooperation with BNI (Bank Nasional Indonesia). BNI supplied 300 bikes and the university itself supplied another 200 bikes and later another 500 bikes, which means there are 1,000 bikes available in total, distributed into nine shelters that are also built by the sponsor of BNI. Each shelter is managed by two officers/keepers. The procedures of borrowing and returning back the bikes are well administered. By filling ID number and other identity on the blank form, the student can take a bike to ride and return it to the next shelter available. The shelters open at 8.00 a.m. to 3.30 p.m.

4

Figure 1.2 Announcement Displayed in Bike Shelter of IPB

Source: researcher‘s photo collection, captured from the announcement displayed in a bike shelter, in IPB (Bogor Institute of Agriculture)

Figure 1.3 Procedures of Bike Borrowing in IPB

Source: researcher‘s photo collection, captured from the announcement displayed in a bike shelter, in IPB (Bogor Institute of Agriculture)

5

Figure 1.4 Borrowing Form of IPB’s Bikes

Source: researcher‘s photo collection, captured from the announcement displayed in a bike shelter, in IPB (Bogor Institute of Agriculture)

Figure 1.5 Returning Form of IPB’s Bikes

Source: researcher‘s photo collection, captured from the announcement displayed in a bike shelter, in IPB (Bogor Institute of Agriculture)

The insight to the UI, ITB, and IPB campus biking allows comparing with the situation at UIN and leads to the following prerequisites: 

Spacious area



Appropriate ratio of bike-to-student (enough supply of bike, that meet the need of students)

6

Due to that, now then researcher tries to identify the possibility to reduce traffic jam in UIN and identify the costs students of UIN should pay with the current condition (time costs and monetary costs). B. Research Question This research follows the concept of a descriptive study that is question related to independent variable, either only one single variable or more, in which the researcher is neither comparing the variable to other samples, nor researching for the correlation of the variable with another variable (Sugiyono, 2012: 35). The question is: What are the economic implications (transportation costs) for individual student while reducing the traffic jam at Campus, and what is a possible solution? C. Research Objectives and Research Benefits 1. Research Objectives a. To examine the possibilities at the UIN premises to become a Green Campus, at least reducing the traffic jam in the Campus. b. To know the trend of transportation modality of UIN Jakarta‘s students c. To know the cost(s) for individual student while reducing the traffic at Campus

7

d. To propose the Campus management a benefitting solution for students and campus, in terms of transportation, and, especially, economic condition. 2. Research Benefits a. Benefits for the researcher 1) This research could become a scientific writing work in economic field, related to the one of issues in UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta. 2) This research could become the learning process in term of theories application in the field. b. Benefit for the campus 1) This research could become a recommendation for the university management to develop a modern and cost efficient Campus mobility system. 2) To enrich the literature collection with a case study on a Campus breakthrough. c. Benefits for students 1) To elaborate the baseline for the continuous research on the economic-of-traffic issues at the Campus. 2) To add the references in the campus concerning economics.

8

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW A. Theories Related 1. Costs Referring to Lewin (1982: 218-219), the term ―cost‖ applied by most economists refers to what is often loosely called ―opportunity cost‖. Peter Lewin, as as an Assistant Professor of Economics and Political Economy at The University of Texas at Dallas, within Journal ―Pollution Externalities: Social Cost and Strict Liability‖, Cato Journal, Vol. 2, No. 1 (Spring 1982), also explained, that: ―Opportunity cost correctly understood refers to the individual decision-making process. In making a rational choice at a point of time, the individual must weigh the perceived alternatives. The cost of choosing any alternative is related to the opportunities sacrificed by forgoing all the others and may be expressed as the utility forgone on the next best alternative. From this point of view, three propositions about cost follow. 1] Cost is borne exclusively by the decision-maker. Obviously, one person‘s decision may influence the costs borne by another but, if understood correctly, any cost must attach to an individual out of choice. 2] Cost is inherently subjective. First, it is expressed in utility terms making it non comparable across individuals if adherence to an ordinal 9

utility concept is to be maintained. Second, cost implies subjective expectations. It refers to the perceived alternatives; it relates to an imagined future. The alternatives at any point of time exist only in the mind of the decision maker, and although there may be some degree of consensus concerning hypothetical imagined future prospects, there almost certainly will remain a divergence of expectations. Thus, costs cannot be measured by an outside observer. 3] Cost is unrealizable. Once a choice is taken, the hypothetical imagined future evolves with time into the actual future and the displaced alternatives cease to exist.‖ Victoria Transport Policy Institute (2011), throughout its release within Transportation Cost and Benefit Analysis II – Air Pollution Costs in www.vtpi.org/tca/tca0510.pdf, explained that, ―Air pollution cost refers to motor vehicle air pollutant damages, including human health, ecological, and aesthetic degradation. Vehicle air pollution costs vary depending on vehicle, fuel, and travel condition. Larger, older and diesel vehicles, and those with ineffective emission controls have higher emission costs. Air pollution emissions are an external cost, and therefore inequitable and inefficient. Lower-income people tend to have relatively high emission vehicles, so emission fees or restrictions tend to be regressive, but many lower-income people experience heavy exposure to air pollutants, and so benefit from emission reduction strategies.‖ 10

Thus, according to such statements revealed above, the cost, especially within this research, is subjective, depends to the interest of the decision-maker, and in this research it tends to be much perceived as ―opportunity cost‖.

2. Benefit According to http://www.thefreedictionary.com/benefit, benefit could means: good, use, help, profit, gain, advantage, favour, reward, utility, merit, boon, mileage, advantage, interest, aid, gain, favour, assistance, betterment. Besides, benefit also defined as: a. welfare b. goodness, good - that which is pleasing or valuable or useful c. advantage, reward - benefit resulting from some event or action Khusnul Khotimah, et. al., (2002:24, 26) stated that the objective of conducting a project is to gain benefit by spend the budget as efficient and effective as possible. Benefit of a project comprises direct benefit, indirect benefit, and intangible benefit. Furthermore, the benefit of project can be classified as follow (Khusnul Khotimah, et. al.,2002: 35-37) Benefit of a project comprises: a. Direct benefit, b. Indirect benefit, and c. Intangible benefit.

11

(1) Direct benefit could be in the form of: a. Output-value improvement, that could because of 1) Physical-product improvement 2) Product quality improvement 3) Change in time and location 4) Change in the shape (grading and processing) b. Cost decrease, that could be: 1) Benefit of mechanism, that could cause a decrease of product unit cost. 2) Decrease in transportation cost 3) Decrease or avoidance of disadvantages (2) Indirect benefit or secondary benefit of a project is benefit/advantage exists or gained outside the project due to the implementation of a project. There are three kinds of indirect/secondary benefit, that are: a. Benefit induced by the existence of project that is usually known as ―multiplier effect‖ of a project. b. Benefit caused by economic of scale. c. Benefit induced by dynamic secondary effects, such as a change in productivity of manpower, caused by improvement of health and education. (3) Intangible benefit, that is difficult to count in monetary value, such as: a. Environmental improvement; 12

b. Improvement of view by the existence of beautiful gardens; c. Improvement of income distribution; d. National integration; e. National defense improvement, and so forth. 3. Cost Benefit Analysis According to Aula Ahmad Hafidh (2010), cost-benefit analysis ―is applied for environmental issues, such as pollution, related to both monetary and nonmonetary, cost and benefit. It is then linked to externality. The monetary value within cost-benefit analysis reflects individual‘s or public‘s preference, which is expressed in ―willingness to pay‖.‖ Ahmad Hafidh (2010) also elaborated that, ―cost-benefit analysis is used to evaluate the consumption of economic resource to be efficient, without considering the distribution, economic stability, etc.‖ Textually, based on Ahmad Hafidh (2010), cost-benefit analysis evaluates loss or gain of a program, plan, or project, by considering the costs to expend and the benefit to yield. -

Feasibility Study Khusnul Khotimah et al. (2002) elaborated that, ―Project is a series of planned-activities with such inputs, to gain benefit or return in the future. Before implementing the 13

project, doing an evaluation or analysis is an obligation. Analysis or evaluation is an assessment to consider and to compare the benefit(s) and the cost(s) of the project. This evaluation or analysis can be used as a planning tool within decision-making process, whether the project is applicable or not, beneficial or not, either for the project-owner‘s interest or the parties getting involved within the project. The evalution of project is identical to the feasibility study.‖ Under Jordan (2002), ―A feasibility study is an abbreviated form of systems analysis that is intended to determine whether a system project should be pursued, which be accomplished with personal interviews and record search. The type of feasibility that has always been of most importance to management has been ―economic feasibility‖—the ability of a system to pay for itself in monetary terms.‖ Rajan, et al. (2006: 6) elaborated that, cost-benefit analysis is process of comparing benefits (often measured in savings or increased profits) with costs associated with a proposed change within an organization. James K. Hammitt and Lisa A. Robinson (2011), elaborated that, benefit-cost analysis is rooted in neoclassical welfare economics, which, in its most simplified form, assumes that individuals act rationally and are 14

primarily motivated by self-interest, making decisions that maximize their welfare. Benefit-cost analysis often involves valuing nonmarket outcomes such as reductions in health and environmental risks. Benefit-cost analysis traditionally uses exponential discounting to reflect time preferences. Benefit-cost analysis can be best viewed as a pragmatic framework for collecting, organizing, and evaluating relevant information. Van Derbeck (2010: 532) explained that, cost-benefit decision is a decision as to whether the benefit received from pursuing a certain course of action exceeds the costs of action. Under Richard N. Langlois (1982), cost-benefit techniques operate by disassembling the effects of a ‗‗social decision‘‘ into its component parts, ascertaining the benefit or cost of each part, and then totaling up the results. This procedure obscures and does violence to the very complex and not fully measurable web of social valuation that actually underlies the problem. In particular, the cost-benefit technique is ad hoc and ahistorical; it is concerned only with the goal of maximization, relegating all else — including human rights — to the derivative status of means toward that end. 4. Green Campus Balsas (2003) within Panitat (2012) revealed that, university area or campus is a unique place where people from different backgrounds, incomes, and attitudes gather for studying, working, and relaxing. In terms 15

of planning, as explained by Toor and Havlick (2004) within Panitat (2012), campus has a mixed use of educational area, recreational area, residential area, and commercial area which facilitate short distance walking in particularly the movement from routine area to gathering places such as library, canteen, sport complex, and lecture hall. Concerning

the

Green

Campus,

as

accessed

at

http://www.neiwpcc.org/neiwpcc_docs/greenbk.pdf, a collaborative effort by US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 1, the New England

Interstate

Water

Pollution

Control

Commission

and

Environmental Training Center (NEIWPCC/NEIETC), and the Northeast Partnership for Environmental Technology Education (NEPETE) within ―Greening the Campus: Where Practice and Education Go Hand in Hand”, elaborated as follow. ―In addition to being learning centers, college and university campuses are self-contained communities that are supported by vast systems of institutional and operational functions. A Green Campus is one that carries out these functions according to a system-wide culture of environmental sustainability, balancing function and design with existing and foreseen resources. A Green Campus is a place where environmentally responsible practice and education go hand in hand and where environmentally responsible tenets are borne out by example. The Green Campus institution is a laboratory of self scrutiny, experimentation, and application. At its best, it is a model 16

environmental

community

where

operational

functions,

business practices, academic programs, and people are interlinked, providing educational and practical value to the institution, the region, and the world.‖ According to Dr. Arif Zulkifli Nasution, an environmentalist, in his writing, http://bangazul.blogspot.com/2012/09/green-campus.html, Green Campus is system of educational approaches, community-service research, and

environment-friendly

location,

involving

campus

civitas

in

environment activity, which has to imply positively to the environment, economics, and social. Green Campus is fusion concept of environment and campus world.

17

B. Previous Research

Researcher Centre for Environmental Studies of UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta, comprising: Dr. Lily Surayya Eka Putri, M. Env. Stud., M. Sungaidi, M. Ag., Kristyanto, M.Sc., Dini Fardila, M.Si., Dasumiati, M.SI. Stijn Van Mol (Magister Thesis)

Stijn Van Mol and Kurniaddin Mahmud

Table 2.1 Previous Research Conducted in UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta’s Campus Research Title Research Objective

Result of Research

Strategi Pengembangan UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta Menuju EcoCampus

To depict the picture, evaluate, and provide recommendation for UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta to become ideal eco-campus

1. The green area in UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta is still under the ideal number. 2. Parking space in UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta is going to be narrower year by year. 3. The increase of motor vehicle in UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta from 2007 to 2011 is 220%.

Analysis of motorcycle technical conditions towards a sustainable campus

To evaluate the possibilities to reduce the number of motorcycles and the emissions at Campus

A Green Campus is identified by three main principles: high energy-efficient buildings, campus master planning & target setting and the integration of facilities, research and education

Needs Analysis of UIN Jakarta‟s Green Campus

To map and classify the modality and mobility of UIN‘s students to the Campus.

Majority respondents are using motorcycle to transport to the Campus.

18

C. Logical Framework Figure 2.1 Logical Framework

Activities

Results/Output s Analysis

Observing State of The Art at Other Universities

Specific Objective

Overall Objective

Searching for Solution of The Traffic Jam in The Campus

Reducing Traffic Jam in Campus

Behaviors Trends

Green Campus Program

University of Indonesia Bogor Institute of Agriculture Bandung Institute of Technology

Motorcycles (and cars) Bulk in Campus

The growth of motorcycles and cars volume in UIN Jakarta‘s Campus I

Structured Interview Literature Review Internet Study

Transportation Modality of UIN Jakarta‘s Students

Survey and Database Analyzing Evaluating Costs & Time

Transport Behavior of UIN Jakarta‘s Students Transportation Modality of UIN Jakarta‘s Students

Suggesting Solution Parking Building

Dormitories 18 19

20

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY A. Scope of Research 1. Research Location Location of research is in campus I UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta. 2. Time of Research Time of research is during February, March, and April 2012. 3. Field Research Field research is conducted in order to obtain primary data directly from students at UIN Jakarta. a. Observations Observations have been conducted to see the implementation of the different Bike in Campus programs, at UI, IPB, and ITB, as benchmarks to analyze the supporting factors and threatening factors toward the Bike in Campus program at those universities. But, this observation is not the core research, unless merely an unspecified descriptive observation (see Sugiyono, 2012: 230), as a complement toward the core research. b. Interviews Interviews have been conducted toward few students, staffs, and employees at UI, IPB, and ITB, to collect data about the Bike in 21

Campus programs at their campus and to learn about supporting and threatening factors. c. Questionnaire In this research, around 1,000 questionnaires are disseminated randomly among students of UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta, to see the trends and tendency of the students at the Campus, in the term of the choice of transportation means, reasons, where they refuel and maintain their vehicles, their transportation and maintenance cost, and their opinion on green campus. Some sheets of the questionnaires are disseminated online via internet, but mostly are disseminated offline toward the students. B. Sampling Method 1. Population Population is the location of generalization comprising object and subject with certain quality and characteristics determined by the researcher to be learnt and then concluded (Sugiyono, 2012: 80). The population of this research are all the students of UIN Jakarta, campus I and campus II, which are entirely amounted 23,000. This data is derived from www.uinjkt.ac.id, accessed on March 26, 2012.

22

2. Sample Sample is part of the amount and characteristics owned by the population (Sugiyono, 2012: 81). The withdrawal of sample within this research is done with nonprobability sampling. Nonprobability sampling is a sampling technique that does not give equal opportunity for each element or members of the population to be selected as sample. (Sugiyono, 2012: 301). Table 3.1 Comparison of Probability Sampling and Non-probability Sampling Sampling Design Consideration Probability Non-probability Cost More expensive More inexpensive Accuracy More accurate Less accurate Time Longer period Shorter period Acceptability of result Universally accepted Rationally accepted Generalization ability Well Poor Source: Kuncoro, Mudrajad, Ph.D. Metode Riset untuk Bisnis & Ekonomi. Jakarta: Erlangga, 2003, p. 111. Specifically, the nonprobability sampling used within this research is convenience sampling which refers to the collection of information from members of the population who are conveniently available to provide it (Uma Sekaran, 2009: 276). Convenience sampling is the procedure to obtain sample unit according to the desire of the researcher. In general, researchers use this method to obtain a list of questions in large and complete quickly and efficient (Mudrajad Kuncoro, 2009: 138). 23

Convenience sampling is most often used during the exploratory phase of a research project and is perhaps the best way of getting some basic information quickly and efficiently (Uma Sekaran, 2009: 276). 3. Sample Size The sample size of this research is determined in accordance with the table of sample size determination revealed by Sugiyono (2012: 87). Within this research, standard error of 1% is used, meaning that the confidence level is 99%. This satandard error is chosen as an effort to minimize a nonrepresentativeness within the sample witdrawn. The following table is the developed from Isaac and Michael formula is below: Where:

S=

S = sample size 2 = Chi square. See Appendix 11 N = population P = probability of accuracy (0.5) Q = probability of error (0.5) d = difference between expected sample and actual sample

Table 3.2 Determination of Sample Size from a Certain Population with Standard Error of 1%, 5%, and 10% N 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75

1% 10 15 19 24 29 33 38 42 47 51 55 59 63 67

S 5% 10 14 19 23 28 32 36 40 44 48 51 55 58 62

10% 10 14 19 23 27 31 35 39 42 46 49 53 56 59

N 280 290 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 550

1% 197 202 207 216 225 234 242 250 257 265 272 279 285 301

S 5% 155 158 161 167 172 177 182 186 191 195 198 202 205 213

10% 138 140 143 147 151 155 158 162 165 168 171 173 176 182

N 2800 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 15000 20000 30000

1% 537 543 558 569 578 586 598 606 613 618 622 635 642 649

S 5% 310 312 317 320 323 326 329 332 334 335 336 340 342 344

10% 247 248 251 254 255 257 259 261 263 263 263 266 267 268

24

N 80 85 90 95 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220 230 240 250 260 270

1% 71 75 79 83 87 94 102 109 116 122 129 135 142 148 154 160 165 171 176 182 187 192

S 5% 65 68 72 75 78 84 89 95 100 105 110 114 119 123 127 131 135 139 142 146 149 152

10% 62 65 68 71 73 78 83 88 92 97 101 105 108 112 115 118 122 125 127 130 133 135

N 600 650 700 750 800 850 900 950 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900 2000 2200 2400 2600

1% 315 329 341 352 363 373 382 391 399 414 427 440 450 460 469 477 485 492 498 510 520 529

S 5% 221 227 233 238 243 247 251 255 258 265 270 275 279 283 286 289 292 294 297 301 304 307

10% 187 191 195 199 202 205 208 211 213 217 221 224 227 229 232 234 235 237 238 241 243 245

N 40000 50000 75000 100000 150000 200000 250000 300000 350000 400000 450000 500000 550000 600000 650000 700000 750000 800000 850000 900000 950000 1000000 

1% 653 655 658 659 661 661 662 662 662 662 663 663 663 663 663 663 663 663 663 663 663 663 664

S 5% 345 346 346 347 347 347 348 348 348 348 348 348 348 348 348 348 348 348 348 348 348 348 349

10% 269 269 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 270 271 271 271 271 271 272

Source: Sugiyono, 2012: 87, tabel 5.1 penentuan jumlah sampel dari populasi tertentu dengan taraf kesalahan 1%, 5%, dan 10%. The table above requires 642 samples for 20,000 population and 649 samples for 30,000 population. Even, for unlimited population, there are only 664 samples required. In this research, due to the population of 23,000, so then the sample size required is between 642 and 649, to stay in standard error of 1%. Therefore, the questionnaires are disseminated to 1,000 respondents, while the returned questionnaires are only 891. C. Data Collection Technique Due to the fact that this research is a descriptive research, therefore the data is typically collected through a questionnaire survey, interviews, observation, or some combination of these methods (Sugiyono, 1992: 225). 25

Survey is general category which comprises questionnaires and interviews as specific methodologies used to conduct survey research. Surveys may be, and usually, are sample surveys. In a sample survey, the researcher infers information about a population of interest based on the responses of a sample drawn from the population; preferably, is a random sample (Diehl and Gay, 1992: 238).

26

Below are levels of measurement Table 3.3 Measurement Levels Tingkat (Level)

Nominal

Ordinal

Interval

Rasio (Ratio)

Deskripsi (Description)

Penggunaan angka untuk mengidentifikasi objek, individu, kejadian, atau kelompok (Using number to identify object, individual, phenomenon, or group) Selain untuk identifikasi, angka, memberi informasi tentang jumlah karakteristik yang dimiliki suatu kejadian, objek, dan lain-lain secara relative. (Beside to identify number, to deliver information on the amount of characteristics of a phenomenon, object, etc, relatively) Memiliki semua sifat-sifat skala nominal dan ordinal serta interval antara dua dua titik yang sama (Characterized by all characteristics of nominal, ordinal, and interval, between the same two points) Menggabungkan semua sifat-sifat skala nominal, ordinal, dan interval, serta memasukkan titik nol (Combining all characteristics of nominal, ordinal, interval, and recognizing point 0)

Dasar operasi empiris (Basic of empirical operation)

Jenis penggunaan (Type of usage)

Penentuan persamaan atau ketidaksamaan (Determination of equality or inequality)

Klasifikasi (Classification)

Percentage

Nonparame tric

Ranking/scoring

Median (means and variance)

Nonparame tric /parametric

Rata-rata variance (Means variance)

Parametric

Rata-rata geometrik/rata-rata harmonic (Geometric/harmonic means)

Parametric

Penentuan lebih besar atau lebih kecil (Determination of ―more than‖ or ―less than‖)

Penentuan persamaan interval (Determination of interval equality)

Penentuan persamaan (Determination of equality)

rasio ratio

Ukuran yang lebih disukai untuk konsep/konstruksi yang kompleks. (Preferred measurement for complex concept/construction) Bila tersedia instrument yang tepat (If appropriate instrument is available)

Jenis statistic (Statistic type) Deskriptif Inferensi (Descriptive) (Inference)

Source: table of four levels of measurement, within Kuncoro, Mudrajad, Ph.D. Metode Riset untuk Bisnis & Ekonomi. Jakarta: Erlangga, 2003, p. 153. 27

D. Data Analysis Technique Susan Stainback in Sugiyono (2012: 243), explained that, ―There are no guidelines in qualitative research for determining how much data and data analysis are necessary to support an assertion, conclusion, and theory‖. Regarding the analysis of qualitative data, Bogdan in Sugiyono (2012: 244) revealed that, ―Data analysis is the process of systematically searching and arranging the interview transcripts, field notes, and other materials that you accumulate to increase your own understanding of them and to enable you to present what you have discovered to others‖. Spradley in Sugiyono (2012: 244) elaborated that, ―Analysis of any kind involves a way of thinking. It refers to the systematic examination of something to determine its parts, the relation among parts, and the relationship to the whole. Analysis is a search for patterns‖. Data analysis within this research is inductive, that is an analysis based on data obtained. According to Miles and Huberman, in Sugiyono (2012: 246), activities within data analysis comprise data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing. 1. Data Reduction Reducing data means summarizing, choosing fundamental things, focusing on important points, searching for the patterns and categorizing.

28

2. Data Display The display of data shows the previous development of data and allows an analysis of the data, which subsequently leads to a forecast of the future development. Miles and Huberman in Sugiyono (2012: 249) suggested using graphic, matrix, network, and chart, beside narrative text, in order to display data. 3. Conclusion Drawing Qualitative research describes new findings, which have not been analyzed before. The finding could be a description of an object that was unclear before then become clear after investigation and analysis, and could also be a causal relationship, interactive, hypothesis, or theory.

Below is the illustration of data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing, as derived, referring, and reconstructed from Sugiyono (2012: 248)

29

Figure 3.1 Illustration of Data Analysis Comprising Data Reduction, Data Display, and Conclusion Drawing Fieldnotes R23r7tgbofgi noCJHSBFDUIFYEIFBERF 8i7463y5ijuniuhbHGBHJiuh9t8 yu43rtik;/jco;l;sdcmldjmj ,.m7&*&^%^**&%$$*jhbdfwebuuughj JFHGJHBCSWDWCFKJBVDFVJNuygtd37 867t4230okvfvb*&^*(&^*(jknm,vljknk vndfjhHUGBHJ*(&*(OUINKJBHNBuvgb hjuytUHGBJVH78698uhijmvdfvdf/.,’;l[p lp[kophuogYFUVJHkjhuki65i9823749o5 8ithjkn.,m9875234jnHGBSCJDHVNKIUH YIUHiuhyiog9875230’[lo]p[\i

Data Reduction Choosing the important data and categorizing EJHCVSAFHJCV JHKCBHSFGIDU FGPUIETYRFJD HSBCJSBYUTJ WEHCBJHGXJC HFVJHVJHCGV DCYTFRKEFJHS MKJHJGJHG

Jhfgsdcsjhgbhjb hjgfuyguhygbg poihckshftwed qtresjhgvcsfkjn npihiufdsgchjgv hgfgtyfuysdhgb hjtriutfsjdhgjhg asfddfpouiewru t

57856438789 56423987086 97843214651 24324754353 4987987897

Data Display: Displaying data in patterns 123456789

ABCDEGHJKLMNPQRSTUV

defhjklmnopqrst

Conclusion

Source: Illustration of data reduction, data display, and verification (Sugiyono, 2012: 248) 30

E. Research Instrument There are two factors determining the quality of research results, those are, quality of research instrument and quality of data collection. Sugiyono (2012: 222) revealed that, within qualitative research, the instrument is the researcher himself. Thus, the researcher as the research instrument also must be validated how far he or she is ready to conduct the research, academically and logistically. Validation is done by the researcher himself, by evaluating the preparation of qualitative method, theory comprehension, knowledge about research object, and the logistics. Qualitative researcher as the human instrument, as insisted by Sugiyono (2012), functions to determine research focus, to select the informants as data resources, to collect data, to assess the data quality, to analyze the data, to interpret the data, and to draw the conclusion of the findings. In viewing the reality, according to Sugiyono (2012), qualitative research assumes that reality is holistic, dynamic, and inseparable into variables. Hence, within qualitative research, the researcher is the key instrument. Lincoln and Guba in Sugiyono (2012) wrote, ―The instrument of choice in naturalistic inquiry is the human. We shall see that other forms of instrumentation may be used in later phases of the inquiry, but the human is the initial and continuing mainstay. But if the human instrument has been used extensively in earlier stages of inquiry, so that an instrument can be constructed that is grounded in the data that the human instrument has product‖.

31

Under Nasution (1988) in Sugiyono (2012: 224), there are seven characteristics of the researcher as research instrument, as the following:

1. Researcher as an instrument is sensitive and can react to any stimulus from the environment that must be assessed meaningful or not for the research.

2. Researcher as an instrument can adapt to all aspects of the circumstances and may collect a variety of data at once.

3. Each situation is a whole. There is no instrument in the form of tests or questionnaires that can capture the whole situation, except human.

4. A situation involving human interaction cannot be understood by mere knowledge. To understand, we have to frequently feel it, into it, based on our knowledge.

5. Researcher as instrument can quickly analyze the data obtained. Researcher can interpret and make a hypothesis immediately to determine the direction of observation, to test the hypotheses that arise immediately.

6. Only human beings as instruments that can draw conclusions based on data collected at one time and used immediately as a reversal to obtain confirmation, alteration, or repair.

7. In the study using a test or quantitative questionnaire the preferred is response that can be quantified in order to be processed statistically, while deviating from it was ignored. With the human as instrument, in qualitative research, a strange response, which deviates, is even given 32

attention. Another response than others, even to the contrary is used to enhance the level of trust and the level of understanding of the aspects studied. As an auxiliary instrument, a structured interview consisting of questions arrangement is set, as the following. F. Operational Variables The variables, subvariables, and indicators of green campus according to the writing of Dr. Arif Zulkifli Nasution, an environmentalist, in his writing, http://bangazul.blogspot.com/2012/09/green-campus.html, are as the following.

No. 1.

Table 3.4 The variables, subvariables, and indicators of green campus according to Dr. Arif Zulkifli Nasution Variable Sub variable Indicator Researchable Criteria Green Building

Building materials

Waste management

2.

Green Place

Environmentfriendly mediapromotiontools Free of air pollution and noise One Stop Service (Otto, 2005)

 Not containing B3  Waste of B3 in the building  Containing reusable element  Recyclable building materials  Local material resource  Supply chain system of building management  Water  Water recirculation  Waste  Sorting and utilizing the waste Reusable material Promotion tools, such as leaflet, brochure, billboard, and banner made from recyclable materials Possession of big Possession of big shading shading trees trees  Healthiness  Food  Library  Supporting facilities for

All facilities are integrated in one local area

33

No.

Variable

Sub variable

Green Open Space

Indicator learning and teching  Composition of built-area in compare to open area  Possessing of green open space  Infiltration wells  Biopori holes  Green roof

Researchable Criteria

 Built-area : open area = 70 : 30  Green open space, minimally, is 30%

 Infiltration wells to absorb rainwater  Optimal biopori hole to absorp rainwater  Green roof used as media of water infiltration Reducing the  Bike path  Bike paths along the use of motor street in the campus  Sidewalk vehicle  Sidewalks along the street in the campus Easy access of  Bus/angkot Optimal time to reach any public public transportation  Electric train transportation  Busway facilities Green Environment  Environment 3.  Media to socialize Behavior knowledge information environment  Persuasion to  Persuading the civitas environment of campus to bike to behavior campus or use the public transportation, natural-resource-saving behavior, and love the environment Environment-  Efficient  Usage of local material friendly transportation  Optimum exposure and behavior power-efficient  Efficient electricity electronic equipment  Efficient water  Reducing abstraction of  Efficient energy groundwater.  Efficient paper  Using the abstraction of groundwater Social Exposure  Environment education to responsibility empowerment the society  ―Save Our Planet‖ exhibition Source: http://bangazul.blogspot.com/2012/09/green-campus.html Water reservoir

34

However, within this research, we limit as the following Table 3.5 The variables, subvariables, and indicators of green campus (UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta case) No. 1.

2.

Variable

Sub variable

Indicator

Question

Green Building

Free of air pollution and noise

Possession of big shading trees

Green Place

Reducing the use of motor vehicle

Bike path

18. What is your opinion on making new garden or green area in the campus? 19. What is your opinion on adding more green vegetations in the campus area? 13. What do you think of biking to campus? 14. What do you think of biking inside campus? (Only for the usage inside the campus) 16. What do you think if there is no car permitted to enter in the campus, but special parking building is provided outside the campus? 17. What do you think if there is no motorcycle permitted to enter in the campus, but special parking building is provided outside the campus? 7. What‘s your daily distance from your accommodation to UIN? 8. How much time do you spend in traffic on your ride to UIN? (Back and forth are summed) 9. How much time do you spend in traffic on your ride to UIN, if there is no daily traffic jam? (Back and forth are summed) 10. During lecturing period, how many times in a week do you go to UIN?

Easy access of Bus/angkot public transportation

35

No. 3.

Variable

Sub variable

Green Behavior

Environmentfriendly behavior

Indicator

Question

Efficient 1) What do you usually chose as transportation your means of transportation to UIN, mostly? 2) What is the reason for your transportation choice? 3) Would you prefer the public transportation, if it is cheaper than private vehicle? 4) Would you prefer the public transportation, if it is faster than private vehicle? 5) Do you often maintain your vehicle, especially motorcycle? 5a1) What is maintained? 5b1) If yes, why? 5c1) How much is spent for maintenance work a year? 5a2) If no, why not? 6) Where do you refuel? 11) Does your family have a motorcycle? 12) Does your family have a car? 15) How much is your weekly transportation costs to campus?

36

CHAPTER IV FINDING AND ANALYSIS A. Findings In the following are the findings from the questionnaires disseminated in campus I UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta (UIN). Around 3.87% of UIN‘s students participated in fulfilling the structured interview. Question 1: Apakah alat transportasi yang paling sering Anda gunakan untuk datang ke kampus?(What do you usually chose as your means of transportation to UIN, mostly?) Table 4.1 Transportation Choice of Respondents No. 1 Transportation choice From 891 respondents a) motorcycle 380 b) public transportation 248 c) bicycle 18 d) on foot 224 e) car 16 f) other 5

100.0% 42.6% 27.8% 2.0% 25.1% 1.8% 0.6%

Source: survey data processed

Question 2: Apa alasan Anda memilih alat transportasi tersebut? (What is the reason for your transportation choice?) Table 4.2 Reason of Respondents in Choosing Their Means of Transport No. 2 Reason From 891 respondents 100.0% a) fast 246 27.6% b) cheap 117 13.1% c) usual 390 43.8% d) hot 12 1.3% e) proud 20 2.2% f) avoid traffic jam 99 11.1% 37

No. 2 Reason Unanswered

From 891 respondents 7

100.0% 0.8%

Source: survey data processed

Question 3: Apakah Anda akan lebih memilih transportasi umum, jika itu akan lebih murah dari kendaraan pribadi? (Would you prefer the public transportation, if it is cheaper than private vehicle?) Table 4.3 Willingness of Respondents to Take Public Transportation if Public Transportation is Cheaper No. 3 Cheaper public transport From 891 respondents 100.0% a) yes 331 37.1% b) no, motorcycle 260 29.2% c) no, car 32 3.6% d) maybe 247 27.7% unanswered 21 2.4% Source: survey data processed

Question 4: Apakah Anda akan lebih memilih transportasi umum, jika itu akan lebih cepat dari kendaraan pribadi? (Would you be prefer to choose public transportation, if it is faster than private vehicle?) Table 4.4 Willingness of Respondents to Take Public Transportation if Public Transportation is Faster No. 4 Faster public transport From 891 respondents 100.0% a) yes 415 46.6% b) no, motorcycle 187 21.0% c) no, car 36 4.0% d) maybe 226 25.4% Unanswered 27 3.0% Source: survey data processed

Question 5: Apakah Anda suka membawa kendaraan Anda, terutama sepeda motor, ke bengkel? (Do you often maintain your vehicle, especially motorcycle?) 38

Table 4.5 Respondents Maintenance on Their Means of Transport No. 5 Maintenance From 891 respondents 100.0% a) Maintaining the vehicle 444 49.8% b) not maintaining the vehicle 396 44.4% unanswered 51 5.7% Source: survey data processed

Question 5a1: Jika ya, apa yang Anda perbaiki? (If yes, which part do you maintain?) Table 4.5a1 Vehicle Component Maintained by Respondents a1 What is maintained? From 891 respondents 100.0% a) lights 22 2.5% b) brakes 75 8.4% c) filters 22 2.5% d) spark-plug 15 1.7% e) all 343 38.5% unanswered 414 46.5% Source: survey data processed

Question 5b1: Jika ya, kenapa? (If yes, why?) Table 4.5b1 Respondents Reason of Maintaining Their Vehicles b1 Why do students maintain their motorcycles? From 891 respondents 100.0% a) safety 129 14.5% b) extending using 33 3.7% c) good condition 292 32.8% d) quality exhaust 14 1.6% unanswered 423 47.5% Source: survey data processed

Question 5c1: Jika ya, berapa banyak yang Anda keluarkan untuk pemeliharaan dalam setahun? (If yes, how much do you spend annually for maintenance?)

39

Table 4.5c1 Respondents’ Transportation Cost per Year c1 How much is spent for maintenance work a year? From 891 respondents a) Rp 20.000 - Rp 50.000 34 b) Rp 50.000 - Rp 100.000 105 c) Rp 100.000 - Rp 200.000 102 d) >Rp 200.000 233 unanswered 417

100.0% 3.8% 11.8% 11.4% 26.2% 46.8%

Source: survey data processed

Question 5a2: Jika tidak, kenapa? (If no, why not?) Table 4.5a2 Reason for Not Maintaining a2 Why students do not maintain their motorbikes? From 891 respondents 100.0% a) not necessary 113 12.7% b) expensive 56 6.3% c) never thought about 129 14.5% unanswered 593 66.6% Source: survey data processed

Question 6: Dimana Anda mengisi bahan bakar? (Where do you refuel?) Table 4.6 Refueling Habit of Respondents No. 6 Where do students refuel their vehicles? From 891 respondents a) always at official 486 b) mostly at official 152 c) sometimes(off., street) 90 d) mostly streetsellers 15 unanswered 148

100.0% 54.5% 17.1% 10.1% 1.7% 16.6%

Source: survey data processed

Question 7: Berapa jarak harian yang Anda tempuh untuk sampai ke UIN? (What‘s your daily distance from your accommodation to UIN?)

40

Table 4.7 Distance to Campus Beaten by Respondents No. 7 Distance from home to the Campus From 891 respondents 100.0% a) 10km 286 32.1% unanswered 10 1.1% Source: survey data processed

Question 8: Berapa lama waktu yang Anda habiskan dalam perjalanan dari dan menuju UIN? (Perjalanan pulang-pergi dijumlahkan) [How much time do you spend in traffic on your ride to UIN? (Back and forth are summed)] Table 4.8 Respondents’ Travel Time to Campus, Including Traffic Jam No. 8 Time with traffic jam From 891 respondents 100.0% a) 5-30 min 318 35.7% b) 30min- 1h 248 27.8% c) 1-2h 176 19.8% d) 2-4h 108 12.1% e) >4h 34 3.8% unanswered 7 0.8% Source: survey data processed

Question 9: Berapa lama waktu yang Anda habiskan dalam perjalanan dari dan menuju UIN, jika tidak ada kemacetan? (Perjalanan pulangpergi dijumlahkan) [How much time do you spend in traffic on your ride to UIN, if there is no daily traffic jam? (Back and forth are summed)]

41

Table 4.9 Respondents’ Travel Time to Campus, Ignoring Traffic Jam No. 9 Time without traffic jam From 891 respondents 100.0% a) 5-30 min 392 44.0% b) 30min- 1h 239 26.8% c) 1-2h 173 19.4% d) 2-4h 62 7.0% e) >4h 7 0.8% unanswered 18 2.0% Source: survey data processed

Question 10: Berapa kali dalam seminggu Anda pergi ke kampus UIN, selama periode aktif kuliah? (During lecturing period, how many times in a week do you go to UIN?) Table 4.10 Respondents’ Attendance Frequency to Campus No. 10 How often do From 891 respondents 100.0% students come to UIN a) once 11 1.2% b) twice 25 2.8% c) 3 times 50 5.6% d) 4 times 334 37.5% e) 5 times or more 466 52.3% unanswered 5 0.6% Source: survey data processed

Question 11: Apakah keluarga Anda memiliki sepeda motor? (Does your family have a motorcycle?) Table 4.11 Motorcycle Ownership of Respondents’ Family No. 11 Does the family own a From 891 respondents motorcycle? a) yes 657 b) no 64 c) more than one 166 unanswered 4

100.0% 73.7% 7.2% 18.6% 0.4%

Source: survey data processed

42

Question 12: Apakah keluarga Anda memiliki mobil? (Does your family have a car?) Table 4.12 Car Ownership of Respondents’ Family No. 12 Does the family From 891 respondents own a car? a) yes 358 b) no 485 c) more than one 42 unanswered 6

100.0% 40.2% 54.4% 4.7% 0.7%

Source: survey data processed

Question 13: Apa pendapat Anda tentang bersepeda ke kampus? (What do you think of biking to campus?) Table 4.13 Respondents Opinion on Biking (Transporting by Bike) to Campus No. 13 Opinion on biking to UIN From 891 respondents 100.0% a) I like the idea 511 57.4% b) very likely 70 7.9% c) unlikely 120 13.5% d) not thinkable 97 10.9% e) other 89 10.0% unanswered 4 0.4% Source: survey data processed

Question 14: Apa pendapat Anda tentang pengadaan sepeda kampus? (Untuk penggunaan di dalam kampus) [What do you think of biking inside campus? (Only for the usage inside the campus)]

Table 4.14 Respondents Opinion on Biking at (inside) Campus No. 14 Opinion on biking at UIN From 891 respondents 100.0% a) I like the idea 533 59.8% b) very likely 217 24.4% c) unlikely 46 5.2% d) not thinkable 55 6.2% e) other 33 3.7% 43

No. 14 Opinion on biking at UIN unanswered

From 891 respondents 7

100.0% 0.8%

Source: survey data processed

Question 15: Berapa biaya transportasi yang Anda keluarkan dalam seminggu? (How much is your weekly transportation costs to campus?) Table 4.15 Respondents’ Transportation Cost per Week No. 15 Transportation costs per From 891 respondents week to come to the Campus a) Rp 0 - Rp 5.000 132 b) Rp 5.000 - Rp 20.000 177 c) Rp 20.000 - Rp 50.000 294 d) Rp 50.000 - Rp 100.000 187 e) >Rp 100.000 91 unanswered 10

100.0% 14.8% 19.9% 33.0% 21.0% 10.2% 1.1%

Source: survey data processed

Question 16: Apa pendapat Anda jika mobil tidak diperkenankan masuk kampus, tetapi disediakan bangunan khusus parkir di luar area kampus? (What do you think if there is no car permitted to enter in the campus, but special parking building is provided outside the campus?) Table 4.16 Respondents Opinion on Car-Free Campus No. 16 Car-free in UIN From 891 respondents 100.0% a) it should be 149 16.7% b) good idea 332 37.3% c) unlikely 227 25.5% d) not thinkable 131 14.7% e) other 48 5.4% unanswered 4 0.4% Source: survey data processed

Question 17: Apa pendapat Anda jika sepeda motor tidak diperkenankan masuk kampus, tetapi disediakan bangunan khusus parkir di luar area kampus? (What do you think if there is no motorcycle 44

permitted to enter in the campus, but special parking building is provided outside the campus?) Table 4.17 Respondents Opinion on Motorcycle-Free Campus No. 17 Motorcycle-free in UIN From 891 respondents a) it should be 90 b) good idea 256 c) unlikely 399 d) not thinkable 103 e) other 38 unanswered 5

100.0% 10.1% 28.7% 44.8% 11.6% 4.3% 0.6%

Source: survey data processed

Question 18: Apa pendapat Anda jika di kampus dibuat kebun, taman, atau area hijau? (What is your opinion on making new garden or green area in the campus?) Table 4.18 Respondents Opinion on New Garden Provision in Campus No. 18 New gardens From 891 respondents 100.0% a) it should be 580 65.1% b) good idea 249 27.9% c) looks impossible 20 2.2% d) not thinkable 17 1.9% e) other 19 2.1% unanswered 6 0.7% Source: survey data processed

Question 19: Apa pendapat Anda tentang penambahan vegetasi tanaman hijau di area kampus? (What is your opinion on adding more green vegetations in the campus area?) Table 4.19 Respondents Opinion on Provision of More Vegetation in Campus No. 19 More vegetation From 891 respondents 100.0% a) beautiful 371 41.6% b) reducing co2 452 50.7% c) looks impossible 18 2.0% 45

No. 19 More vegetation d) not thinkable e) other unanswered

From 891 respondents 17 27 6

100.0% 1.9% 3.0% 0.7%

Source: survey data processed

B. Analysis The analysis is not using and describing all components of data, rather only focusing on the quantified data only. ANALYSIS OF THE RESULTS Table 4.20 Transportation-Modality Mapping No. 1 Transportation choice 100.0% a) motorcycle 42.6% b) public transportation 27.8% c) bicycle 2.0% d) on foot 25.1% e) car 1.8% f) other 0.6% Source: survey data analysed

From the transportation modality mapped above, it can be figured out as the following. Figure 4.1 Trend of Transportation Choice Motorcycle, 42.6% Public transportation, 27.8% Bicycle, 2% On foot, 25.1% Car, 1.8% Other, 0.6% Source: survey data analysed

46

Table 4.21 The Dominant Reason of Respondents in Choosing Means of Transport No. 2 Reason 100.0% 2nd rank a) fast 27.6% 3rd rank b) cheap 13.1% 1st rank c) usual 43.8% d) hot 1.3% e) proud 2.2% f) avoid traffic jam 11.1% not identified 0.8% Source: survey data analysed

The three ranks show the reasons why respondents choose their transportation means. The highest rank ―usual‖ is considered that respondents actually choose the transportation means as the way it is. The next most frequent answers are considered as ―fast‖ and ―cheap‖, in which ―fast‖ is more preferable than ―cheap‖. The description above is more detail elaborated in specifications such as the following: Table 4.22 Reasons Mapping on Transportation Choice REASON

100.00%

FAST 2nd rank

27.60%

Transportation Means

a) motorcycle b) public transportation c) bicycle d) on foot e) car f) other

% of total

21.32% 2.13% 0.56% 2.58% 0.56% 0.45%

Rank

1st rank 3rd rank 2nd rank

Elaboration: Those who said ―fast‖ as their reason, mostly, are the motorcycle users in the first rank, those walking in the second rank, and those using public transportation in the third rank. Meanwhile, the question is then, how could walking be faster than using public transportation? What makes walking faster than using public transportation? It will be elaborated later, in the interpretation and evaluation. 2nd rank a) motorcycle 3.59% CHEAP 13.10% b) public transportation 6.85% 1st rank rd 3 rank c) bicycle 0.45% 47

REASON

100.00%

CHEAP 3rd rank

13.10%

Transportation Means

d) on foot e) car f) other

% of total

Rank

2.24%

3rd rank

-

Elaboration: Those who said ―cheap‖ as their reason, mostly, are the users of public transportation in the first rank, the motorcycle users in the second rank, and those walking in the third rank. The question is, what means-of-transport could be more-economic than the use of motorcycle? It will be elaborated later, in the interpretation and evaluation. a) motorcycle 6.51% 3rd rank b) public transportation 17.73% 2nd rank USUAL c) bicycle 0.45% 43.80% st d) on foot 18.30% 1st rank 1 rank e) car 0.67% f) other 0.11% Elaboration: Those who said ―usual‖ as their reason, mostly, are those walking in the first rank, the users of public transportation in the second rank, and the motorcycle users in the third rank. ―Usual‖ indicates that the respondents have been using their current transportation means for long time, and therefore it has become their usual means of transport. Under author‘s subjective perspective, ―usual‖ doesn‘t reflect the real reason, but rather only a current condition of the respondents, that they are ―usual‖ to do so. Hence, it is necessary to elaborate what are the reasons for 18.30% of the respondents to walk, what makes 17.73% of the respondents use public transportation, and what makes 6.51% of the respondents use motorcycle. a) motorcycle 0.11% b) public transportation 0.34% Dominant c) bicycle 0.22% FEELING HOT 1.30% d) on foot 0.34% Dominant e) car 0.34% Dominant f) other Elaboration: Feeling ―hot‖ leads 0.34% respondents to use public transportation and also leads other 0.34% respondents to use car as transportation means. But, surprisingly, another 0.34% respondents choose to walk on foot when they feel hot. a) motorcycle 1.46% 1st rank b) public transportation c) bicycle 0.34% 2nd rank PROUD 2.20% d) on foot 0.22% 3rd rank e) car 0.22% f) other Elaboration: Those who said ―proud‖ as their reason, mostly, are the motorcycle users in the first rank, the bicycle users in the second rank, and the car users in the third rank. Unlike the other, 0.22% respondents proud to walk on foot. a) motorcycle 9.65% 1st rank AVOID b) public transportation 0.56% 3rd rank 11.10% TRAFFIC JAM c) bicycle 48

REASON AVOID TRAFFIC JAM

100.00%

11.10%

Transportation Means

% of total

d) on foot e) car f) other

0.90% -

Rank

2nd rank

Elaboration: To avoid traffic jam, the most favorite transportation means chosen by respondents are motorcycles. Then, in the second rank is walking. On what distance could walking be considered more effective to avoid traffic jam, than using public transportation? It will be evaluated in the interpretation and evaluation. a) motorcycle b) public transportation 0.22% 2nd rank c) bicycle UNANSWERED 0.80% d) on foot 0.56% 1st rank e) car f) other Source: survey data analysed

From the table above, it can then be projected in the figure as follow. Figure 4.2 Reasons Function to Transportation Means

Source: survey data analysed

The figure above projects the reasons ―fast‖, ―cheap‖, ―usual‖, and ―avoid traffic jam‖, as dominant reasons for the respondents in choosing their

49

transportation means in comparison to ―feeling hot‖ and ―proud‖. However, the reason ―usual‖ is ignored because it does not represent the true reason. The figure reflects that reasons such as ―fast‖, ―proud‖, and ―avoid traffic jam‖, are dominated by motorcycle drivers. In other words, the reasons why respondents choose motorcycle are dominantly because, as data obtained, three things: 1) Respondents need ―fast‖ transportation means to reach the Campus. 2) Respondents feel ―proud‖ of their motorcycle. It indicates that respondents consider a status as the reason to bring their motorcycle to the Campus. 3) Respondents need a transportation solution to the Campus that is able to ―avoid traffic jam‖. It could indicates that any traffic congestions happened (in any certain distance) between their home toward the Campus. Furthermore, if the axes X and Y of the Figure 4.3 are switched one to the other, that is, function of trasnportation means to the reasons, it can be reflected as follow. Figure 4.3 Transportation Means Function to Reasons

Source: survey data analysed

50

The figure above shows that the majority of the respondents use ―motorcycle‖, ―public transportation‖, and walking ―on foot‖, to reach the Campus. While, the minority of them use ―bicycle‖, ―car‖ (their own car), and ―other‖ transportation means. The figure above could also partially be explained per transportation means as the following. 1.

Motorcycle Table 4.23 Reason of Motorcycle Users Reason for Using Motorcycle a) fast b) cheap c) usual d) hot e) proud f) avoid traffic jam

42.6% respondents 21.32% 3.59% 6.51% 0.11% 1.46% 9.65%

Source: survey data analysed

The table above then can be projected as the following. Figure 4.4 Respondents Reasons of Choosing Motorcycle

Source: survey data analysed

51

The motorcycle users, mostly, said that ―motorcycle‖ is ―fast‖ and is used to ―avoid traffic jam‖. 2.

Public Transportation Table 4.24 Respondents Reason of Using Public Transportation Reason for Public Transportation a) fast b) cheap c) usual d) hot e) proud f) avoid traffic jam unanswered

248 19 61 158 3 0 5 2

27.8% respondents 2.13% 6.85% 17.73% 0.34% 0 0.56% 0.22%

Source: survey data analysed

Table above is projected as the following figure. Figure 4.5 Respondent Reason of Using Pablic Transportation

Source: survey data analysed

52

The figure above reflects that the use of public transportation is most frequently considered as ―usual‖, but later on it will be ignored because it does not represent the real reason. Therefore, ―cheap‖ is the dominant reason of why respondents use public transportation as their means of transport, to reach the Campus. No one of the respondents said that feeling ―proud‖ is their reason to use public transportation. They choose public transportation because it is ―cheap‖, not because they are ―proud‖ of using public transportation. 3.

Bicycle Table 4.25 Respondents Reason of Using Bicycle a) b) c) d) e) f)

Reason for Bicycle fast cheap usual hot proud avoid traffic jam

18 5 4 4 2 3 0

2.0% 0.56% 0.45% 0.45% 0.22% 0.34% 0

Source: survey data analysed

The table above can be depicted as the following figure. Figure 4.6 Respondents Reason of Using Bicycle to Campus

Source: survey data analysed

53

The figure above shows that the most dominant reason why respondents use bicycle to reach the campus is because it is ―fast‖. But then, how does it differ from the ―fast‖-ness of motorcycle? Tables below will elaborate such analysis toward it. Table 4.26 Comparison between Motorcycle Speed and Bicycle Speed No. 7 Distance

Motorcycle: 380 respondents fib fibxi

xi

Bicycle: 18 respondents fim fimxi 5 5

a) 10km

10 km

175

1,750

1

10

unanswered

3 (ignored) 377

18

67.5

2,724/377 fib

= 7.23 km

67.5/18 fim

= 3.75 km

Total Average distance No. 8 Time with traffic jam

92

fibxi 1,610

5

fimxi 87.5

b) 30min- 1h

45 minutes

144

6,480

5

225

c) 1-2h

90 minutes

98

8,820

4

360

d) 2-4h

180 minutes

33

5,940

4

720

e) >4h

240 minutes

13

3,120

0

0

380

25,970

18

1,392.5

a) 5-30 min

xi 17.5 minutes

0 2,724

Total

140

= 68.34 minutes = 1 hour 8.34 minutes = 0.106 km per minute = 6.3 km per hour fibxi 2,450

9

= 77.36 minutes = 1 hour 17.36 minutes = 0.048 km per minute = 2.9 km per hour fimxi 157.5

145

6,525

3

135

c) 1-2h

90 minutes

72

6,480

6

540

d) 2-4h

180 minutes

20

3,600

0

0

e) >4h

240 minutes

2

480

0

0

Average travel time, including traffic jam

25,970/380

Relative speed

7.23 km / 68.34 minutes

No. 9 Time without traffic jam a) 5-30 min

xi 17.5 minutes

b) 30min- 1h

45 minutes

unanswered Total

fib

1 (ignored) 379

6,612.5/18

3.75 km / 77.36 minutes fim

0 19,535

832.5

18

54

No. 9 Time without traffic jam Average travel time, without traffic jam

xi

fib

fibxi = 51.54 minutes = 0.140 km per minute = 8.4 km per hour

19,535/379 7.23 km / 51.54 minutes

Relative speed

fim 832.5/18 3.75 km / 46 minutes

fimxi = 46 minutes = 0.081 km per minute = 4.9 km per hour

Source: survey data analysed

Table 4.27 The Speed of Car and Public Transportation No. 7 Distance

Car: 16 respondents fic ficxi

xi

Public Transportation: 248 respondents fip fipxi 13 13

a) 10km

10 km

8

80

98

980

16

111

unanswered

2 (ignored)

Total Average distance No. 8 Time with traffic jam

246

6.94 km fic

ficxi

6.75 km

2

15

31

fipxi 542.5

b) 30min- 1h

45 minutes

4

180

74

3,330

c) 1-2h

90 minutes

4

360

65

5,850

d) 2-4h

180 minutes

4

720

59

10,620

e) >4h

240 minutes

2

480

16

3,840

16

1,755

a) 5-30 min

xi 17.5 minutes

1,659.5

fip

unanswered

3 (ignored)

Total

245

24,182.5

1

= 109.69 minutes = 1 hour 49.69 minutes = 0.063 km per minute = 3.8 km per hour ficxi 17.5

65

fipxi 1,137.5

45 minutes

8

360

63

2,835

c) 1-2h

90 minutes

3

270

81

7,290

d) 2-4h

180 minutes

4

720

33

5,940

Average travel time, including traffic jam

1,755 / 16

Relative speed

6.94 / 109.69

No. 9 Time without traffic jam a) 5-30 min b) 30min- 1h

xi 17.5 minutes

fic

24,182.5 / 245

= 98.7 minutes = 1 hour 38.7 minutes

6.75 / 98.7

= 0.068 km per minute = 4.1 km per hour

fip

55

No. 9 Time without traffic jam

xi 240 minutes

e) >4h

fic

ficxi

fip

0

0

16

1,367.5

unanswered

fipxi 480

2 4 (ignored)

Total Average travel time, without traffic jam

1,367.5 / 16

6.94 / 85.47

Relative speed

= 85.47 minutes = 1 hour 25.47 minutes = 0.081 km per minute = 4.87 km per hour

17,682.5

244

17,682.5 / 244

= 72.47 minutes = 1 hour 12.47 minutes

= 0.93 km per minute = 5.57 km per hour

6.75 / 72.47

Source: survey data analysed

Table 4.28 Speed of Walking “on Foot” and “Other” Transportation Means No. 7 Distance

On Foot: 224 respondents ficxi f

xi

ic

a) 10km

10 km

unanswered

No. 8 Time with traffic jam a) 5-30 min

xi 17.5 minutes

b) 30min- 1h

45 minutes

c) 1-2h

90 minutes

d) 2-4h

180 minutes

e) >4h

240 minutes

unanswered Total Average travel time, including traffic jam

Relative speed

ip

154 42 14 6 3 5 (ignored)

154

219

369

5

33

369 / 219

1.68 km

33 / 5

6.6 km

Total Average distance

Other: 5 respondents fipxi f

84 56 45 30

ficxi

fic

0

0 0 2 2 1

0 8 15 10

fip

188 20 3 7 2 4 (ignored)

3,290

220

6,200

900 270 1,260 480

6,200 / 220

= 28.18 minutes

1.68 / 28.18

= 0.059 km per minute = 3.6 km per hour

0 1 2 1 1 0 5 645 / 5

6.6 / 129

fipxi 0 45 180 180 240 645 = 129 minutes = 2 hour 9 minutes = 0.051 km per minute = 3.07 km per hour

56

No. 9 Time without traffic jam

xi

fic

17.5 minutes

a) 5-30 min b) 30min- 1h

45 minutes

c) 1-2h

90 minutes

d) 2-4h

180 minutes

e) >4h

240 minutes

unanswered

ficxi

fip

176 17 11 5 2 13 (ignored)

3,080

211

6,215

Total

fipxi 17.5

1 3 0 0 1 0

765 990 900 480

135 0 0 240

5

392.5

392.5 / 5

= 78.5 minutes = 1 hour 18.5 minutes

= 29.45 minutes

Average travel time, without traffic jam 6,215 / 211

Relative speed

1.68 / 29.45

= 0.057 km per minute = 3.4 km per hour

6.6 / 78.5

= 0.084 km per minute = 5.04 km per hour

Source: survey data analysed

Table 4.29 Recapitulation of Relative Speed Travel Time

Transportation Means

Average Distance

Motorcycle Bicycle

7.23 km 3.75 km

1 hour 8.34 minutes 1 hour 17.36 minutes

Car

6.94 km

1 hour 49.69 minutes

6.75 km

1 hour 38.7 minutes

1.68 km 6.6 km

28.18 minutes 2 hour 9 minutes

Public Transportation On Foot Other

Including Traffic Jam

Excluding Traffic jam 51.54 minutes 46 minutes 1 hour 25.47 minutes 1 hour 12.47 minutes 29.45 minutes 1 hour 18.5 minutes

Relative Speed= Distance / Travel Time Excluding Traffic Including Traffic Jam 6.3 km per hour 8.4 km per hour 2.9 km per hour 4.9 km per hour 3.8 km per hour

4.87 km per hour

4.1 km per hour

5.57 km per hour

3.6 km per hour 3.07 km per hour

3.4 km per hour 5.04 km per hour

Source: survey data analysed

Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6

Table 4.30 Recapitulation of Relative Speed, Sequenced from the Fastest to the Slowest Including Traffic Jam Excluding Traffic Jam Motorcycle (6.3 km/h) Motorcycle (8.4 km/h) Public Transportation (4.1 km/h) Public Transportation (5.57 km/h) Car (3.8 km/h) Other (5.04 km/h) On Foot (3.6 km/h) Bicycle (4.9 km/h) Other (3.07 km/h) Car (4.87 km/h) Bicycle (2.9 km/h) On Foot (3.4 km/h)

Source: survey data analysed

From the analysis above can be concluded that, it is reasonable to say that bicycle is “fast”. When the road toward Campus is fluent and not 57

jammed with any congestion, the speed of bicycle exceeds the speed of car, slightly. It may because of some factors not identified by this research. 4.

On Foot Table 4.31 Respondents Reason of Walking on Foot Reason for Walking on Foot a) fast b) cheap c) usual d) hot e) proud f) avoid traffic jam unanswered

25.1% of respondents 2.58% 2.24% 18.29% 0.34% 0.22% 0.89% 0.56%

Source: survey data analysed

The table above is then projected in the following figure. Figure 4.7 Respondents Reason of Walking on Foot to Campus

Source: survey data analysed

The figure shows that the most dominant reason of walking on foot is because it is ―usual‖. This usuality might be allowed by the fact that 58

the distance taken by those walking short distance (1.68 km in average) is considered as most efficient,

in comparison to longer

distances. The comparison is shown in the table as follow. Table 4.32 Average Distance Taken by Each Transportation Means Transportation Means Motorcycle Bicycle Car Public Transportation On Foot Other

Average Distance 7.23 km 3.75 km 6.94 km 6.75 km 1.68 km 6.6 km

Source: survey data analysed

5.

Car Table 4.33 Respondents Reason of Using Their Car Reason for Using Car (Private Own) a) fast b) cheap c) usual d) hot e) proud f) avoid traffic jam

1.8% of respondents 0.56% 0.67% 0.34% 0.22% -

Source: survey data analysed

The table above is then projected as the following figure. Figure 4.8 Respondents Reason of Using Car to Campus

Source: survey data analysed

59

The figure shows that none of the respondents said that car is ―cheap‖ nor saying that they used it to ―avoid traffic jam‖. Some 0.56% respondents using car said that their reason is because car is ―fast‖, but then the reason ―fast‖ is totally subjective reason. Moreover, it is proven that, even if there is no congestion along the road toward the Campus, the overall speed on the street for cars (used by 1.8% of the respondents) is slightly slower than the overall speed by using bicycles (used by another 2.0% of the respondents), as demonstrated in the following table.

Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6

Table 4.34 Recapitulation of Relative Speed, Sequenced from the Fastest to the Slowest Including Traffic Jam Excluding Traffic Jam Motorcycle (6.3 km/h) Motorcycle (8.4 km/h) Public Transportation (4.1 km/h) Public Transportation (5.57 km/h) Car (3.8 km/h) Other (5.04 km/h) On Foot (3.6 km/h) Bicycle (4.9 km/h) Other (3.07 km/h) Car (4.87 km/h) Bicycle (2.9 km/h) On Foot (3.4 km/h)

Source: survey data analysed

The table 4.34 shows that the majority of car users (0.67% of respondents) are using their own car because it is their ―usual‖ means of transport. The remaining two reasons are, they feel ―hot‖ then they use their own car, and the other (or 0.22% of total respondents) admits that they are ―proud‖ of their car.

60

6.

Other

Table 4.35 Reason of Those Taking Other Transportation Means Reason for other transportation means 5 respondents 100.0% st a) fast 4 80.0% 1 rank b) cheap 0 0.0% nd c) usual 1 20.0% 2 rank d) hot 0 0.0% e) proud 0 0.0% f) avoid traffic jam 0 0.0% unanswered 0 0.0% Source: survey data analysed

The table above shows that those respondents not transporting to campus by motorcycle, public transportation, bicycle, on foot, nor by car, are presumably taking ojek, becak, andong, or bajaj. This assumption is supported by primary data from questionnaire, as below. Table 4.36 Description of Those Taking Other Transportation OTHER Question

Respondent

%

No. 1 Transportation choice

5

0.6%

a) motorcycle

0

-

b) public transportation

0

-

c) bicycle

0

-

d) on foot

0

-

e) car

0

-

f) other

5

0.6%

No.2 Reason

5

0.6%

a. fast

4

0.4%

b. cheap

0

-

c. usual

1

0.1%

d. hot

0

-

e. proud

0

-

f. avoid traffic jam

0

-

unanswered

0

-

s374

s375

s376

s377

s378

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

61

No.3 Cheap public transport

5

0.6%

a. yes

2

0.2%

b. no, motorcycle

0

-

c. no, car

0

-

d. maybe

3

0.3%

unanswered

0

-

No. 4 Fast public transport

5

0.6%

a. yes

4

0.4%

b. no, motorcycle

0

-

c. no, car

0

-

d. maybe

1

0.1%

unanswered

0

-

No. 7 Distance

5

0.6%%

a. 10km

1

0.1%

unanswered Average distance No.8 Time with traffic jam

0.6%

a. 5-30 min

0

-

b. 30min- 1h

1

0.1%

c. 1-2h

2

0.2%

d. 2-4h

1

0.1%

e. >4h

1

0.1%

Average time spent including traffic jam No. 9 Time without traffic jam

0.6%

a. 5-30 min

1

0.1%

b. 30min- 1h

3

0.3%

c. 1-2h

0

-

d. 2-4h

0

-

e. >4h

1

0.1%

Average time spent excluding traffic jam

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1 1

1

1

1 1

1

1 1

0 [(45 minutes x 2)+(90 minutes x 2)+(180 minutes x 1)+240 minutes]  5 = (90+180+180+240)  5 = 690/5 = 138 minutes = 2 hours 18 minutes 5

unanswered

1

1

0 [(4x2)+(7.5x2)+(10x1)]  5 = (8+15+10)  5 = 33/5 = 6.6 km 5

unanswered

1

1 1

1

1

1

0 [(17.5 minutes x 1)+(45 minutes x 3)+240 minutes]  5 = (17.5+135+240)  5 = 392.5  5 = 78.5 minutes = 1 hour 18.5 minutes

62

No. 10 How often to UIN in a week a. Once b. Twice c. 3 times d. 4 times e. 5 times or more unanswered Average frequency to campus 15 Transportation cost/week

5 0.6% 1 0.1% 1 0 0 1 0.1% 1 3 0.3% 1 1 1 0 [(1 x 1)+(4 x 1)+(5 x 3)]  5 = (1+4+15)  5 = 20  5 = 4 times/week 5 0.6%

a. Rp 0 - Rp 5.000

0

-

b. Rp 5.000 - Rp 20.000

0

-

c. Rp 20.000 - Rp 50.000

2

0.2%

d. Rp 50.000 - Rp 100.000

2

0.2%

e. >Rp 100.000

1

0.1%

unanswered Average transportation cost in a week

1

1

1

1

1

0 [(Rp35,000 x 2)+(Rp75,000 x 2)+Rp100,000]  5 = (Rp70,000+Rp150,000+Rp100,000)  5 = Rp320,000  5 = Rp64,000 per week

Source: survey data analysed

Table 4.37 Transportation Cost per Week of Those Taking Other Transportation Average distance Average time spent including traffic jam

6.6 km 2 hours 18 minutes (back and forth)

Average time spent excluding traffic jam

1 hour 18.5 minutes (back and forth)

Average frequency to campus

4 times/week

Average transportation cost in a week

Rp 64,000 per week

Transportation cost per single travel to campus Source: survey data analysed

Rp 64,000/[4 times x 2(back and forth)] = Rp8,000

―Other‖ transportation used by the respondents is identified as a vehicle taking distance of 6.6 km and costs Rp8,000. Table 4.38 Willingness to Take Public Transportation No. 3 Cheaper public transport 100.0% a) yes 37.1% b) no, motorcycle 29.2% c) no, car 3.6% d) maybe 27.7% Unanswered 2.4% 63

No. 4 Faster public transport a) yes b) no, motorcycle c) no, car d) maybe Unanswered

100.0% 46.6% 21.0% 4.0% 25.4% 3.0%

Source: survey data analysed

Table 4.39 Comparison between Tendency Take Public Transportation if It is Cheaper and if It is Faster Do you want to move to If public transportation If public transportation public transportation… is cheaper? is faster? a) yes 37.1% 46.6% b) no, motorcycle 29.2% 21.0% c) no, car 3.6% 4.0% d) maybe 27.7% 25.4% unanswered 2.4% 3.0% Source: survey data analysed

Figure 4.9 Comparison between Tendency to Take Public Transportation if It is Cheaper and if It is Faster

Source: survey data analysed

The chart shows that the respondents go rather for the speed factor than the costs they have to spend for the transportation. The possibility to take public transportation is higher if it would be ―faster‖, in comparison to ―cheaper‖.

64

7.

MAINTENANCE The detail of those maintaining and not maintaining is shown in the

following table. Table 4.40 Specific Overview of Respondents Who Maintains and Don’t Maintain Their Vehicles % of % of total YES maintaining respondents a. Motorcycle 72.30% 36.03% b. public transportation 12.84% 6.40% c. bicycle 1.80% 0.90% d. on foot 10.59% 5.27% e. car 2.03% 1.01% f. other 0.45% 0.22% total 100.00% 49.83% % of not % of total NO maintaining respondents a. motorcycle 14.90% 6.62% b. public transportation 42.17% 18.74% c. bicycle 2.53% 16.84% d. on foot 37.88% 16.84% e. car 1.77% 0.79% f. other 0.76% 0.34% Total 100.00% 44.44% Source: survey data analysed

The highest rank of respondents maintaining their vehicles are those who use the motorcycle as means of transport. Meanwhile, the first and second highest ranks of respondents who do not maintain their vehicles are those who go for public transportation as means of transport and those who walk from their home to the campus. The calculation below shows the average maintenance costs spent by the respondents annually. 65

Table 4.41 Average Annual Maintenance Cost xi 35.000 75.000 150.000 200.000 Total Average maintenance cost/year

fi 34 105 102 233 474

fixi 1,190,000 7,875,000 15,300,000 46,600,000 70,965,000 Rp149,715.19

Source: survey data analysed

The average annual maintenance cost spent by respondents who maintain their vehicles is Rp149,715.19 or Rp150,000 (per year), what sense Rp12,500 per month that means Rp416.67 per day, if it would be traced on daily basis. The description below shows the average distance to Campus. Table 4.42 Average Distance Taken by Respondents xi 1 km 2 km 4 km 7.5 km 10 km Total Average distance to campus

fi 202 136 85 172 286 881

fixi 202 272 340 1290 2860 4964 5.6 km

Source: survey data analysed

Average distance taken by the respondents is 5.6 km. Further details will be elaborated in specific elaboration for per-transportation-means analysis. The description below shows the average travel time per ride to Campus. Table 4.43 Respondents’ Average Travel Time if Traffic-Jam Time is Included xi 17.5 minutes 45 minutes 90 minutes 180 minutes 240 minutes Total Average time spent, with traffic jam

fi 318 248 176 108 34 884

fixi 5,565 minutes 11,160 minutes 15,840 minutes 19,440 minutes 8,160 minutes 60,165 minutes 68.06 minutes

Source: survey data analysed

66

The time consumed in traffic jam includes, the average (daily) travel time of the respondents for single travel (not back-and-forth) to the Campus and amounts to 68.06 minutes, or 1 hour 8 minutes. Table 4.44 Respondents’ Average Travel Time, Including & Ignoring Traffic-Jam Time, and Average Time Spent Amid Traffic Jam xi fi fixi 17.5 minutes 392 6,860 minutes 45 minutes 239 10,755 minutes 90 minutes 173 15,570 minutes 180 minutes 62 11,160 minutes 240 minutes 7 1,680 minutes Total 873 46,025 minutes Average time spent, without traffic jam 52.72 minutes Average time spent, with traffic jam 68.06 minutes Average time spent amid traffic jam 15.34 minutes Source: survey data analysed

Disregarding the time consumed amid traffic jam, the average (daily) travel time of the respondents for single travel (not back-and-forth) is 52.72 minutes. The following presents the calculation of the average respondents‘ attendance frequency to Campus.

Table 4.45 Average of Respondents’ Attendance Frequency to Campus Frequency of coming (xi) fi fixi 1 11 11 2 25 50 3 50 150 4 334 1,336 5 466 2,330 Total 886 3,877 Average coming per week 4.37  5 times per week Source: survey data analysed

67

In average, the respondents come 4.37 times to the Campus a week, during lecturing period. Figure 4.10 Motorcycle Ownership of Respondents Family

Source: survey data analysed

Respondents whose family has motorcycle in their house are amounted 73.7% + 18.6% = 92.3% respondents. Meanwhile, the respondents currently using motorcycle are 42.6% respondents. It remains 49.7% leaving their motorcycle in their houses. It means that there are other 49.7% respondents to become potential new motorcycle users, or 116.58% of the current motorcycle users. If all respondents owning motorcycle would come to Campus by motorcycle, there would be twice of the bulk of motorcycles that currently are often carried to the campus. The impact that possibly happens is that all empty space in the campus will be all covered by motorcycles, even those motorcycles would not all be accommodated again by the available space 68

within the campus. It even could become worse, if thousands of new students would come to the Campus by motorcycle, plus, in the in the same time, the number of students graduated from the campus is much smaller than the new students. Figure 4.11 Car Ownership of Respondents Family

Source: survey data analysed

Comparing to the current car users of only 0.07% of total students, the potential new car users are 1.7% of total students, which means 2,500% or 25 times of the current car users. This potentiality is supported by the fact that average distance taken by the respondents is only 5.6 km.

Table 4.46 Time-Consumed Comparison between Motorcycle and Car in Reaching The Campus Motorcycle a. 5-30 min b. 30min- 1h c. 1-2h d. 2-4h e. >4h unanswered

No. 8 Time with traffic jam 380 respondents Car 92 a. 5-30 min 144 b. 30min- 1h 98 c. 1-2h 33 d. 2-4h 13 e. >4h 0 unanswered

16 respondents 2 4 4 4 2 0 69

Motorcycle xi

17.5 min 45 min 90 min 180 min 240 min Total Average

fi 92 144 98 33 13 380

Motorcycle a. 5-30 min b. 30min- 1h c. 1-2h d. 2-4h e. >4h unanswered xi fi 17.5 min 140 45 min 145 90 min 72 180 min 20 240 min 2 Total 379 Average

No. 8 Time with traffic jam 380 respondents Car fixi xi 17.5 min 1,610 min 45 min 6,480 min 90 min 8,820 min 180 min 5,940 min 240 min 3,120 min 25,970 min Total Average 68.34 min No. 9 Time without traffic jam 380 respondents 140 145 72 20 2 1 fixi 2,450 min 6,525 min 6,480 min 3,600 min 480 min 19,535 min 51.54 min

Car a. 5-30 min b. 30min- 1h c. 1-2h d. 2-4h e. >4h unanswered xi

17.5 min 45 min 90 min 180 min 240 min Total Average

fi 2 4 4 4 2 16

fi 1 8 3 4 0 16

16 respondents fixi 35 min 180 min 360 min 720 min 480 min 1,775 min 110.94 min 16 respondents 1 8 3 4 0 0 fixi 17.5 min 360 min 270 min 720 min 0 1,367.5 min 85.47 min

Source: survey data analysed

In case of traffic jams motorcycles are the preferred means of transport chosen by the respondents in order to travel to the Campus. In comparison to the car the motorcycle would be 42.6 minutes faster (110.94 – 68.34 = 42.6). In case there is no traffic jam, the motorcycle would be 33.93 minutes faster (85.47 – 51.54 = 33.93) than the car. Hence, if we average both cases above, a motorcycle is faster than a car by (42.6 + 33.93) / 2 = 38.27 minutes. 70

Table 4.47 Respondents Family Ownership of Motorcycle and Car Do your family own… motorcycle car a) yes 73.7% 40.2% b) no 7.2% 54.4% c) more than one 18.6% 4.7% unanswered 0.4% 0.7% Source: survey data analysed

Figure 4.12 Respondents Family Ownership of Motorcycle and Car, In Comparison

Source: survey data analysed

Table 4.47 and Figure 4.12 show that the number of motorcycles owned by respondents is larger than the number of cars. Table 4.48 Comparison of Respondents Opinion on Bike to and on Bike at Campus Opinion on biking… to campus (back and forth) at (inside) campus a) I like the idea 57.4% 59.8% b) very likely 7.9% 24.4% c) unlikely 13.5% 5.2% d) not thinkable 10.9% 6.2% e) other 10.0% 3.7% unanswered 0.4% 0.8% Source: survey data analysed

71

Figure 4.13 Comparison of Respondents Opinion on Bike to and on Bike at Campus

Source: survey data analysed

Table 4.48 and Figure 4.13 indicate that respondents‘ preference to bike at (inside) the campus is higher rather than to transport by bike from their home to the Campus.

Table 4.49 Respondents’ Weighted Average Transportation Cost per Week Transportation cost/week (xi) fi fixi Rp2,500 132 330,000 Rp12,500 177 2,212,500 Rp35,000 294 10,290,000 Rp75,000 187 14,025,000 Rp100,000 91 9,100,000 Total 881 35,957,500 Weighted average Rp40,814.42 transportation cost/week Source: survey data analysed

72

Table 4.49 conveys that the average transportation costs spent per week per respondent amount to Rp 40,814.42 (As respondents averagely come to campus 4.37 times a week, this means that the respondents spend Rp40,814.42 / 4.37 = Rp9,339.68 per day). The result of the calculation is true. The calculation comes from 98.9% of the respondents comprising those using motorcycles, public transportation, bicycle, car, walking, and using other transportations. The table 4.49 above is more detail elaborated by the following table. Table 4.50 Detail Elaboration of Each Level of Weekly Transportation Cost No. 15 Transportation cost/week

1) RP 0 - RP 5.000

From 891 Respondents

100.0%

132

14.8%

1) motorcycle 2) public transportation 3) bicycle 4) on foot

2) RP 5.000 - RP 20.000

9 6 3 114

177

1) motorcycle 2) public transportation 3) bicycle 4) on foot

3) RP 20.000 - RP 50.000

4) RP 50.000 - RP 100.000

294

1) motorcycle 2) public transportation 3) bicycle 4) on foot 5) car 6) other

10.3% 5.1% 0.6% 3.9%

33.0% 166 80 1 42 3 2

187

1) motorcycle 2) public transportation 3) bicycle 4) on foot 5) car 6) other

5) >RP 100.000

19.9% 92 45 5 35

1) motorcycle 2) public transportation 3) bicycle 4) on foot 5) car 6) other

1.0% 0.7% 0.3% 12.8%

18.6% 9.0% 0.1% 4.7% 0.3% 0.2%

21.0% 84 75 6 17 3 2

91

9.4% 8.4% 0.7% 1.9% 0.3% 0.2%

10.2% 28 39 2 12 9 1

3.1% 4.4% 0.2% 1.3% 1.0% 0.1%

73

6) not identified

10

1.1%

1) motorcycle 2) public transportation 3) bicycle 4) on foot 5) car

1 3 1 4 1

0.1% 0.3% 0.1% 0.4% 0.1%

Source: survey data analysed

But, when it goes through the fact in the reality, found that it is not appropriate to bring the number of respondents who walk on foot, in the calculation, because walking is not costly. Then, it is necessary to erase the number of respondents walking on foot, from the calculation. The detail composition of respondents spending such transportation is as below.

Table 4.51 Detail Elaboration of Each Level of Weekly Transportation Cost, by Ignoring Those Walking No. 15 Transportation cost/week

1) RP 0 - RP 5.000

From 891 Respondents

1) motorcycle 2) public transportation 3) bicycle

2) RP 5.000 - RP 20.000

142

252

5) >RP 100.000 1) motorcycle 2) public transportation 3) bicycle 5) car 6) other

10.3% 5.1% 0.6%

28.3% 166 80 1 3 2

170

1) motorcycle 2) public transportation 3) bicycle 5) car 6) other

1.0% 0.7% 0.3%

15.9% 92 45 5

1) motorcycle 2) public transportation 3) bicycle 5) car 6) other

4) RP 50.000 - RP 100.000

2.0% 9 6 3

1) motorcycle 2) public transportation 3) bicycle

3) RP 20.000 - RP 50.000

100.0%

18

18.6% 9.0% 0.1% 0.3% 0.2%

19.1% 84 75 6 3 2

79

9.4% 8.4% 0.7% 0.3% 0.2%

8.9% 28 39 2 9 1

3.1% 4.4% 0.2% 1.0% 0.1%

74

6) not identified 1) motorcycle 2) public transportation 3) bicycle 5) car

6

0.7% 1 3 1 1

0.1% 0.3% 0.1% 0.1%

Source: survey data analysed

Table 4.52 Weighted Average Transportation Cost, Ignoring Those Walking No. 15 Transportation cost/week 667 74.9% 1) Rp0 - Rp5.000 18 2.0% 2) Rp5.000 - Rp20.000 142 15.9% 3) Rp20.000 - Rp50.000 252 28.3% 4) Rp50.000 - Rp100.000 170 19.1% 5) >Rp100.000 79 8.9% 6) not identified 6 0.7% Transportation cost/week (xi) fi fixi Rp2,500 Rp45,000 18 Rp12,500 Rp1,775,000 142 Rp35,000 Rp8,820,000 252 Rp75,000 Rp12,750,000 170 Rp100,000 Rp7,900,000 79 Total Rp31,290,000 661 Weighted average transportation cost/week Rp47,337.3676 Source: survey data analysed

Besides, if the bicycle users are neglected or it is presumed that those using bicycle also do not spend any transportation cost, so the calculation will become as the following table.

Table 4.53 Weighted Average Transportation Cost, Ignoring Those Walking and Those Using Bicycle No. 15 Transportation cost/week 649 72.8% 1) RP 0 - RP 5.000 15 1.7% 2) RP 5.000 - RP 20.000 137 15.4% 3) RP 20.000 - RP 50.000 251 28.2% 4) RP 50.000 - RP 100.000 164 18.4% 5) >RP 100.000 77 8.6% 6) not identified 5 0.6% 75

Transportation cost/week (xi) Rp2,500 Rp12,500 Rp35,000 Rp75,000 Rp100,000 Total Weighted average transportation cost/week

fi

fixi 37,500 1,712,500 8,785,000 12,300,000 7,700,000 30,535,000

15 137 251 164 77 644

Rp47,414.5963

Source: survey data analysed

Hence, the total transportation costs spent by respondents using motorcycle, public transportation, each, during four-year studying period is calculated in the following. Rp47,414.5963 x 16 weeks x 8 semesters = Rp6,069,068.33 Figure 4.14 Comparison of Respondents Opinion on Car-Free UIN and Motorcycle-Free UIN

Source: survey data analysed

76

Figure 4.14 conveys that respondents rather sympathise with forbidding cars to enter the campus, than forbidding the motorcycle on the premises of the Campus. Figure 4.15 Respondents’ Opinion on New Gardens Provision in UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta’s Campus

Source: survey data analysed

Figure 4.15 indicates that 28% of the respondents are not only perceiving gardens inside the campus as a good idea, but 65% of the respondents consider more gardens the Campus area are desirable.

77

Figure 4.16 Respondents’ Opinion on More Vegetations Provision in UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta’s Campus

Source: survey data analysed

Figure 4.16 shows that majority of the respondents realize that more vegetation must exist, especially to reduce the CO2 in the campus.

78

C. Evaluation and Interpretation 1. Recapitulation of Time Consumed and Cost Spent by Respondents Table 4.54 Summary of Weighted Average Costs and Weighted Average Time Spent by Respondents SUMMARY OF COST AND TIME SPENT Rp70,965,000 Weighted average maintenance cost/year 474 respondents 4964 km Weighted average distance to campus 881 respondents 60,165 minutes Weighted average time spent, with traffic jam 884 respondents 46,025 minutes Weighted average time spent, without traffic jam 873 Weighted average time spent amid traffic jam 68.06 – 52.72 3,877 Weighted average coming per week 886 35,957,500 Weighted average transportation costs/week 881

Rp149,715.19 5.6 km 68.06 minutes 52.72 minutes 15.34 minutes 4.37  5 times per week Rp40,814.42

Source: survey data analysed

The general transportation costs are Rp40,814.42 per week. In this case, no separation between fuel cost and other transportation cost has been taken, because of the number derived from all respondents, without differing those who transport by their own vehicles and those who transport by public transportation. For those who use their own vehicles, the term ―transportation cost‖ refers to the cost they spent for fuel. Meanwhile, for those who use public transportation, the term ―transportation cost‖ refers to the pay for the driver or provider.

79

2. Total Cost and Total Time Spent during the 4 Years of Study The total cost spent during the 4 years (normal) studying at the Campus, assigned to all respondents, without differentiating the transportation means one to another, is projected as follow. Rp40,814.42 x 16 weeks x 8 semesters = Rp5,224,245.76 Nevertheless, due to the fact that walking on foot and transporting by bicycle are not costly, in term of money, so then the number of respondents walking on foot and using bicycle are excluded. As the result, hence the real weighted average transportation cost is calculated as follow. Rp47,414.5963 x 16 weeks x 8 semesters = Rp6,069,068.33 In addition, for particular respondents using ―motorcycle‖ and ―car‖, they are assigned with additional costs, comprising maintenance cost and parking costs. The parking costs are assigned to ―motorcycle‖ and ―car‖ inside the Campus, due to the parking as shown in the figure as follow. Figure 4.17 Parking Cost in UIN Jakarta

Source: researcher‘s foto collection, captured from the display in UIN Syarif nHidayatullah Jakarta

80

Table 4.55 Estimated Maintenance, Transportation, Parking Costs Spent by Motorcycle Users Estimated total cost spent by a student during 4 years, for maintenance and transportation Maintenance cost Transportation cost Parking Cost Total

Rp149,715.19 x 4 years Rp47,414.5963 x 16 weeks x 8 semesters Rp500 x 5 days x 16 weeks x 8 semesters

Rp598,860.76 Rp6,069,068.33 Rp320,000 Rp6,987,929.09

Source: survey data analysed

Table 4.56 Estimated Maintenance, Transportation, Parking Costs Spent by Car Users Estimated total cost spent by a student during 4 years, for maintenance and transportation Maintenance cost Transportation cost Parking Cost Total

Rp149,715.19 x 4 years Rp47,414.5963 x 16 weeks x 8 semesters Rp1,000 x 5 days x 16 weeks x 8 semesters

Rp598,860.76 Rp6,069,068.33 Rp640.000 Rp7,307,929.09

Source: survey data analysed

However, the calculation in Tables 4.54 and 4.55 above are not assigned for all respondents, but only for those using ―motorcycle‖ and ―car‖ as transportation means to Campus. Beside the cost in terms of money, this study also estimates the costs spent by the students, in term of time. Estimated total time spent by a student during 4 years, only amid the traffic jam 15.34 minutes x 5 days x 16 weeks x 8 semesters = 9,817.6 minutes = 163. 63 hours

3. Opportunity Lost of Respondents % time amid traffic jam

= (15.34 minutes/68.06 minutes) x 100% =

22.54% of total travel time to campus for a day

If the 22.54% is traced to the total average transportation cost of Rp5,224,245.76 (for during 4 years study period), it would be 22.54% x Rp5,224,245.76 = Rp1,177,489.42 81

Hence, it means that averagely students are losing Rp1,177,489.42 during for years only in the middle of traffic jam, that is also meaning opportunity lost by that amount and productive time.

D. Suggested Alternative Solution www.uinjkt.ac.id, told that the new comers are increase year by year. This website telss that, the number of UIN Jakarta‘s students until now reached more than 23,000 with an average new students per year approximately 4,000 people. www.uinjkt.ac.id, supported by a correction in www.fitk-uinjkt.ac.id, accessed 27th March, 2013, reveals that, up the 85th graduation in 2011, UIN Hidayatullah Jakarta has resulted more than 50,000 alumni. id.wikipedia.org, accessed 27th March, 2013, reveals that, until the 72nd graduation in 2008, UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta has resulted 36,099 alumni. According to Lily (2011: 32), 2007  1,152 vehicles (motorcycles + cars) 2011  3,552 vehicles (motorcycles + cars) which means an increase of 220% during 4 years. If the growth is constant for 4 years later, so in 2015 would be 220% x 3,552 vehicles = 7,814.4  7,814 vehicles. 2015  7,814 vehicles (motorcycles + cars)

2008 (72nd graduation)  36,099 alumni, comprising 19,174 (S1) or 53.12%, 1,273 (S2) or 3.53%, and 426 (S3) or 1.18%. 82

2011 (85th graduation)  more than 50.000 alumni, but unfortunately there is no detail information in the website. Then, we assume that the percentages are relatively similar, that are (S-1) 53.12%, (S-2) 3.53%, and (S-3) 1.18%. Therefore, the alumni in 2011 amount to S-1= 53.12% x 50.000 = 26,560 alumni S-2= 3.53% x 50.000 = 1,765 alumni S-3= 1.18% x 50.000 = 590 alumni

Approach used: (Graduates Basis, last few convocations/graduations) www.uinjkt.ac.id, accessed 1 April 2013, reveals that, in the 80th Graduation, the number of graduates reached a very high number, which are 1.100 graduates. www.uinjkt.ac.id, accessed 1 April 2013, UIN Jakarta, again, allowed at least 841 new graduates of academic year 2011/2012. The inauguration, and at once, the graduation ceremony were done at 86th Graduation in Auditorium Prof. Dr. Harun Nasution, Saturday (28/11). www.uinjkt.ac.id, accessed 1 April 2013, tells that, UIN Jakarta‘s 87th Graduation on Saturday (14/7) would engage 1,181 graduates. http://www.restrojaksel.info, accessed 9th July 2013, tells that, UIN Jakarta‘s 88th Graduation conducted in November 2012 inaugurated 1,166 graduates.

83

www.uinjkt.ac.id, accessed 1 April 2013, wrote that, technically, the 89th Graduation was conducted for two days due to the number of graduates amounted to 1.437 people. Table 4.57 Growth of UIN Jakarta’s Graduates Data Found in Single Annum Wisuda-71

685

Wisuda-83

895

Wisuda-85

683

Wisuda-86

841

Wisuda-87

1181

Wisuda-88

1166

Wisuda-89

1437

Wisuda-90

1345

Data Found in Accumulation http://berasa-terbangtinggi.blogspot.com/2011/08/universitas-islamnegeri-jakarta-uin.html revealed that until Wisuda72, UIN Jakarta has inaugurated 36,099 graduates/alumni, which means that the average per convocation is [36,099 – 685 graduates of Wisuda 71] devided by 71 convocations, or, 35,414  71 = 498.79  499 graduates per convocation. It means that Wisuda-72 to Wisuda-82, excluding Wisuda71, inaugurated 499 graduates in average. http://www.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/tentang-uin.html reveals that until Wisuda-85, revealed that until Wisuda-85 UIN Jakarta has inaugurated more than 50,000 graduates/alumni. It means, the students graduated between Wisuda-72 to Wisuda-85 is amounted 50,000-36,099=13,901 graduates. To fulfill some unidentified Wisudas, the calclulation below is used: 13,901-(895 of Wisuda-83)-(683 of Wisuda-85)= 12,323. There are 13 convocations between Wisuda-72 to Wisuda-85, comprising two identified wisudas, and the remaining 11 unidentified wisudas. To complete the graduates number in each unidentified wisudas, then 12,323 is devided by 11 convocations, equals to 1,120.27 1,120 graduates per convocations.

Source: internet publication data analysed

From the table above, then the growth simulation is made and described in the table below. 84

Table 4.58 UIN Jakarta’s Graduates Growth Graduation Graduates Wisuda-71 685 Wisuda-72 499 Wisuda-73 1120 Wisuda-74 1120 Wisuda-75 1120 Wisuda-76 1120 Wisuda-77 1120 Wisuda-78 1120 Wisuda-79 1120 Wisuda-80 1120 Wisuda-81 1120 Wisuda-82 1120 Wisuda-83 895 Wisuda-84 1120 Wisuda-85 683 Wisuda-86 841 Wisuda-87 1181 Wisuda-88 1166 Wisuda-89 1437 Wisuda-90 1345

Table 4.59 UIN Jakarta’s Graduates Descriptive Statistic Summary, by MS Excel Mean 1052.75 Median 1120 Mode 1120 Standard Deviation 224.4389 Sample Variance 50372.83 Kurtosis 1.054979 Skewness -0.993964 Range 935 Minimum 502 Maximum 1437 Sum 21055 Count 20 Source: Microsoft Excel‘s Data Analysis

Source: Internet publication analysed

Figure 4.18 Growth of UIN Jakarta’s Graduates

Source: Internet publication analysed

85

2012  23,000 total students In average, there is an annual increase of around 4,000 students. With the assumption that there are 3 convocations/graduations annually Table 4.60 Forecasted Growth of UIN Jakarta’s Students from 2013 to 2017 Year 2012 2013

2013 2014

2015

2016

2017

Period

Per 89th Graduation Per 90th Graduation

Per 91st Graduation Per 92nd Graduation Per 93rd Graduation Per 94th Graduation Per 95th Graduation Per 96th Graduation Per 97th Graduation Per 98th Graduation Per 99th Graduation Per 100th Graduation Per 101st Graduation Per 102nd Graduation Per 103rd Graduation

Number of UIN Jakarta’s Students 23,000 23,000 existing students – 1,437 graduates = 21,563 students

Annual Average 23,000

21,563 students – 1,345 graduates + 4,000 new comers = 24,218 students Downward Deviation Base Case Upward Deviation New Comers: 4,000, annually Graduates: 1,053-224= 829, every convocation 24,218 – 829= 23,329 23,329 – 829= 22,500 22,500 – 829 + 4,000= 25,671 25,671 – 829= 24,842 24,842 – 829= 24,013 24,013 – 829 + 4,000= 27,184 27,184 – 829= 26,355 26,355 – 829= 25,526 25,526 – 829 + 4,000= 28,697 28,697 – 829= 27,868 27,868 – 829= 27,039 27,039 – 829 + 4,000= 30,210 30,210 – 829= 29,381

New Comers: 4,000, annually Graduates: 1,053, every convocation 24,218 - 1,053= 23,165 23,165 - 1,053= 22,112 22,112 - 1,053 + 4,000= 25,059 25,059 - 1,053= 24,006 24,006 - 1,053= 22,953 22,953 - 1,053 + 4,000= 25,900 25,900 - 1,053= 24,847 24,847 - 1,053= 23,794 23,794 - 1,053 + 4,000= 26,741 26,741 - 1,053= 25,688 25,688 - 1,053= 24,635 24,635 - 1,053 + 4,000= 27,582 27,582 - 1,053= 26,529

New Comers: 4,000, annually Graduates: 1,053+224=1,277, every convocation 24,218 - 1,277= 22,941 22,941 - 1,277= 21, 664 21, 664 - 1,277 + 4,000= 24,287 24,287 - 1,277= 23,010 23,010 - 1,277= 21,733 21,733- 1,277 + 4,000= 24,456 24,456 - 1,277= 23,179 23,179 - 1,277= 21,902 21,902 - 1,277 + 4,000= 24,625 24,625 - 1,277= 23,348 23,348 - 1,277= 22,071 22,071 - 1,277 + 4,000= 24,794 24,794 - 1,277= 23,517

22,364

23,726

24,567

25,408

26,249

Source: Internet publication analysed

86

Figure 4.19 The Rough Forecast on the Growth of Total Students in Few Years Later

Source: Internet publication analysed

87

If it is traced to the total number of UIN Jakarta‘s students, so the generalization of student modality to campus, as functioned to the transportation choice, would be as follow. Table 4.61 Forecasted Transportation Modality of UIN Jakarta’s Students in the Highest, Base, and Lowest Possible Case Highest Base Case Lowest Case Case 27,043 24,821 23,257 No. 1 Transportation choice 100.00% 1) motorcycle

42.64871%

11,533

10,586

9,919

2) public transportation 3) bicycle 4) on foot

27.83389% 2.02020% 25.14029%

7,527 546 6,799

6,909 501 6,240

6,473 470 5,847

1.79574%

486

446

418

0.56117% 100.00%

152 27,043

139 24,821

131 23,257

5) car 6) other Total

Source: survey data analysed under three scenarios

Due to the current condition of the Campus in which vehicles jammed in the Campus are motorcycles and cars –also that UIN is projected to become a Green Campus--, then the students to be accommodated by dormitory(s) or vehicles to be accommodated by parking building(s) are maximally amounted to 11,533 + 486 = 12,019 students (riders). This is the forecast based on generalization of the respondents. Meanwhile, if it is forecasted based on the vehicles growth stated by the previous research, it would be as follow. 2007  1152 vehicles 2011  3552 vehicles Growth of vehicles in Campus from 2007 to 2011 is 220%, which means 55% per year. 88

It leads to an understanding that from 2011 to 2013 is growing 110% that leads the number of vehicles increase from 3552 vehicles in 2011, to 3552 + (110% x 3552) = 3552 + 3907 = 7,459 vehicles (riders), in 2013. To bridge between both 12,019 students (riders) and 7,459 vehicles (riders), it is necessary to average them two. The average is (12,019 + 7,459) / 2 = 19,478 / 2 = 9,739 students (riders). Then, if the solution to do by UIN Jakarta is building a parking area, so the parking building must be able to accommodate 9,739 vehicles of the students (riders). The composition is: Cars = (486 / 12,019) x 9,739 = 393.8  394 units Motorcycles = (11,533 / 12,019) x 9,739 = 9,345.19  9,345 units I Nyoman Sugita within his thesis ―Kajian Kelayakan Finansial Pembangunan Gedung Parkir Universitas Udayana di Jalan Sudirman Denpasar‖ (I Nyoman Sugita, 2011: 13), wrote, ―Satuan ruang parkir adalah luas efektif untuk memarkir satu kendaraan baik mobil penumpang, truk maupun motor. Menurut buku panduan parkir yang dikeluarkan Departemen Perhubungan Darat. Mobil penumpang Golongan I dibedakan atas bukaan pintu mobil untuk pekerja kantoran, universitas dan kantor pemerintah, Golongan II untuk olahragawan, pusat hiburan, hotel, rumah sakit dan bioskop serta Golongan III untuk penyandang cacat, karena membutuhkan pintu terbuka sangat lebar. Tabel… berikut ini adalah table penentuan ukuran Satuan Ruang Parkir.‖ 89

(Parking Space Unit is effective area to park a vehicle either passenger car, truck, or motorcycle. Under Guidebook of Parking published by Department of Ground Transportation, passenger car is classified according to the width of open-door. Type I are for officers, universities, and government officers; Type II are for sporters, entertainment center, hotel, hospitals, and movie theaters; and Type III are for disabled people, due to the need of very wide open-door. Table…below is the table of measurement of the Parking Space Unit.)

No. 1.

2. 3.

Table 4.62 Type of Vehicle and Parking Space Unit Type of Vehicle Parking Space Unit (m²) Passenger Car Type I 2,30 x 5,00 Passenger Car Type II 2,50 x 5,00 Passenger Car Type III 3,00 x 5,00 Bus/Truck 3,40 x 12,5 Motorcycle 0,75 x 2,00

Source: Tabel 2.2 Satuan Ruang Parkir, Abubakar (1998) within I Nyoman Sugita, 2011: 13

Under the table above, it could be understood that a car (type one: for office, universities, and government) is equivalent 7 motorcycles, in term of Parking Space Unit. The calculation is below. 1 car type I = (2.30 x 5.00) / (0.75 x 2.00) motorcycles = 11.5 / 1.5 = 7.66666667  7 motorcycles. The need of UIN Jakarta is: Car = 394 units Motorcycles = 9,345 units  equivalent to 9,345 / 7 cars = 1,335 cars Hence, the total need of parking building of UIN Jakarta is equivalent to 394 cars + 1,335 cars = 1,729 cars. 90

PARKING BUILDING Based on ekonomi.kompasiana.com, accessed March 24, 2013, with capacity of 1000 cars a parking building could costs around Rp 60 billion on an area of 30.000 m2, in which per m2 of the land is priced Rp 2 million. Then, the cost needed by UIN Jakarta is around: (1,729 / 1000) x Rp60,000,000,000 = 1.729 x Rp60,000,000,000 = Rp103,740,000,000. Assuming that this parking building is depreciated for 25 years by using straight-line method, then its annual depreciation cost is as below, referring to the formula deliberated in Financial Accounting, 3rd edition (Robert Libby et.al., 2001: 433) and Financial Accounting, 5th edition (Libby et.al..2007: 409). Depreciable Amount x Straight-Line Rate = Annual Depreciation Expense (Cost – Residual Value) x 1/Useful Life = Annual Depreciation Expense The annual depreciation is then, (Rp103,740,000,000 – Rp 0) x 1/25 = Rp4,149,600,000. Below is financial analysis of parking building. Table 4.63 Forecasted Operational Cost Annual cost Usage of Electricity Wage of Employee

Maintenance Costs

1 manager 2 security guards 2 technicians 2 officers 2 cleaning services

Detail Unit Cost Period (months) 1.000.000 12 3.200.000 12 2.200.000 12 2.200.000 12 2.200.000 12 2.200.000 12 Lump-sum 12

Total Derived and reconstructed from Hasil analisis, 2011, I Nyoman Sugita, 2011: 59

Price (Rp) 12.000.000 38.400.000 26.400.000 26.400.000 26.400.000 26.400.000 12.000.000 168.000.000

91

Figure 4.20 Parking Tariff in UIN Jakarta

Source: author‘s photo collection, captured 9 th February 2012

The formula used is the present value of year by year (or also known as present value of C to be received in t periods at r percent per period) by formula below, as revealed in book Essentials of Corporate Finance (Ross et.al., 2007: 109).

The interest rate to discount the future value into present value is BI rate, which is middle value between interest rates of banks and the inflation rate. Below are BI rates from 5 July 2005 up to 7 March 2013. The discount rate used in the calculation is the average of those BI rates. Below is BI rates (Based on decision of board meeting) from 5th July 2005 to 7th March 2013, in www.bi.go.id, accessed 8th April 2013. Table 4.64 BI Rate (Based on decision of board meeting), 5th July 2005 to 7th March 2013 No. 1 2 3 4

Period 7 March 2013 12 Feb 2013 10 Jan 2013 11 Dec 2012

BI Rate 5.75% 5.75% 5.75% 5.75%

No. 32 33 34 35

Period 4-Aug-10 5-Jul-10 3-Jun-10 5-May-10

BI Rate 6.50% 6.50% 6.50% 6.50%

No. 63 64 65 66

Period 8-Jan-08 6-Dec-07 6-Nov-07 8-Oct-07

BI Rate 8.00% 8.00% 8.25% 8.25% 92

No. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

Period 8 Nov 2012 11 Oct 2012 13 Sept 2012 9 Aug 2012 12-Jul-12 12-Jun-12 10-May-12 12-Apr-12 8-Mar-12 9-Feb-12 12-Jan-12 8-Dec-11 10-Nov-11 11-Oct-11 8-Sep-11 9-Aug-11 12-Jul-11 9-Jun-11 12-May-11 12-Apr-11 4-Mar-11 4-Feb-11 5-Jan-11 3-Dec-10 4-Nov-10 5-Oct-10 3-Sep-10

BI Rate No. 5.75% 36 5.75% 37 5.75% 38 5.75% 39 5.75% 40 5.75% 41 5.75% 42 5.75% 43 5.75% 44 5.75% 45 6.00% 46 6.00% 47 6.00% 48 6.50% 49 6.75% 50 6.75% 51 6.75% 52 6.75% 53 6.75% 54 6.75% 55 6.75% 56 6.75% 57 6.50% 58 6.50% 59 6.50% 60 6.50% 61 6.50% 62 AVERAGE

Period 6-Apr-10 4-Mar-10 4-Feb-10 6-Jan-10 3-Dec-09 4-Nov-09 5-Oct-09 3-Sep-09 5-Aug-09 3-Jul-09 3-Jun-09 5-May-09 3-Apr-09 4-Mar-09 4-Feb-09 7-Jan-09 4-Dec-08 6-Nov-08 7-Oct-08 4-Sep-08 5-Aug-08 3-Jul-08 5-Jun-08 6-May-08 3-Apr-08 6-Mar-08 6-Feb-08

BI Rate 6.50% 6.50% 6.50% 6.50% 6.50% 6.50% 6.50% 6.50% 6.50% 6.75% 7.00% 7.25% 7.50% 7.75% 8.25% 8.75% 9.25% 9.50% 9.50% 9.25% 9.00% 8.75% 8.50% 8.25% 8.00% 8.00% 8.00%

No. 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93

Period BI Rate 6-Sep-07 8.25% 7-Aug-07 8.25% 5-Jul-07 8.25% 7-Jun-07 8.50% 8-May-07 8.75% 5-Apr-07 9.00% 6-Mar-07 9.00% 6-Feb-07 9.25% 4-Jan-07 9.50% 7-Dec-06 9.75% 7-Nov-06 10.25% 5-Oct-06 10.75% 5-Sep-06 11.25% 8-Aug-06 11.75% 6-Jul-06 12.25% 6-Jun-06 12.50% 9-May-06 12.50% 5-Apr-06 12.75% 7-Mar-06 12.75% 7-Feb-06 12.75% 9-Jan-06 12.75% 6-Dec-05 12.75% 1-Nov-05 12.25% 4-Oct-05 11.00% 6-Sep-05 10.00% 9-Aug-05 8.75% 5-Jul-05 8.50% 7.98%  8%

Source: internet publication (www.bi.go.id)

93

Table 4.65 Payback Period and Discounted Payback Period of Parking Building

Year

Initial Investment (Rp) 1

0

Operational Cost (Rp) *) increase 10% per annum 2 -

-103.740.000.000

Monthly payment

9345 motorcycles x 12 months

3

112140 4

-

-

394 Cars x 12 months

Revenue (Rp)

5

4718 6

(4+6) 7

8

Accumulated Net Inflow (Rp) 9

-

-

-

-

-

Monthly payment

Undiscounted Net Inflow (Rp)

Discounted Net Inflow (Rp)

Accumulated DiscountedNet-Inflow (Rp)

10

11

-

-

1

-168.000.000

100.000

11.214.000.000

150.000

707.700.000

11.921.700.000

11.753.700.000

11.753.700.000

10.883.055.555,56

10.883.055.555,56

2

-184.800.000

110.000

12.335.400.000

160.000

754.880.000

13.090.280.000

12.905.480.000

24.659.180.000

11.064.368.998,63

21.947.424.554,18

3

-203.280.000

120.000

13.456.800.000

170.000

802.060.000

14.258.860.000

14.055.580.000

38.714.760.000

11.157.772.570,24

33.105.197.124,42

4

-223.608.000

130.000

14.578.200.000

180.000

849.240.000

15.427.440.000

15.203.832.000

53.918.592.000

11.175.270.396,90

44.280.467.521,32

5

-245.968.800

140.000

15.699.600.000

190.000

896.420.000

16.596.020.000

16.350.051.200

70.268.643.200

11.127.570.117,36

55.408.037.638,69

6

-270.565.680

150.000

16.821.000.000

200.000

943.600.000

17.764.600.000

17.494.034.320

87.762.677.520

11.024.209.080,11

66.432.246.718,80

7

-297.622.248

160.000

17.942.400.000

210.000

990.780.000

18.933.180.000

18.635.557.752

106.398.235.272

10.873.668.958,64

77.305.915.677,45

8

-327.384.473

170.000

19.063.800.000

220.000

1.037.960.000

20.101.760.000

19.774.375.527

126.172.610.799

10.683.479.807,80

87.989.395.485,25

9

-360.122.920

180.000

20.185.200.000

230.000

1.085.140.000

21.270.340.000

20.910.217.080

147.082.827.879

10.460.314.496,72

98.449.709.981,97

-396.135.212

190.000

21.306.600.000

240.000

1.132.320.000

22.438.920.000

22.042.784.788

169.125.612.667

10.210.074.373,01

108.659.784.354,99

11

-435.748.733

200.000

22.428.000.000

250.000

1.179.500.000

23.607.500.000

23.171.751.267

192.297.363.934

9.937.966.939,12

118.597.751.294,11

12

-479.323.607

210.000

23.549.400.000

260.000

1.226.680.000

24.776.080.000

24.296.756.393

216.594.120.327

9.648.576.254,28

128.246.327.548,39

13

-527.255.967

220.000

24.670.800.000

270.000

1.273.860.000

25.944.660.000

25.417.404.033

242.011.524.360

9.345.926.713,38

137.592.254.261,77

14

-579.981.564

230.000

25.792.200.000

280.000

1.321.040.000

27.113.240.000

26.533.258.436

268.544.782.796

9.033.540.797,87

146.625.795.059,65

15

-637.979.720

240.000

26.913.600.000

290.000

1.368.220.000

28.281.820.000

27.643.840.280

296.188.623.075

8.714.491.341,54

155.340.286.401,18

16

-701.777.692

250.000

28.035.000.000

300.000

1.415.400.000

29.450.400.000

28.748.622.308

324.937.245.383

8.391.448.807,08

163.731.735.208,27

17

-771.955.462

260.000

29.156.400.000

310.000

1.462.580.000

30.618.980.000

29.847.024.538

354.784.269.921

8.066.724.025,73

171.798.459.234,00

18

-849.151.008

270.000

30.277.800.000

320.000

1.509.760.000

31.787.560.000

30.938.408.992

385.722.678.913

7.742.306.812,67

179.540.766.046,67

19

-934.066.109

280.000

31.399.200.000

330.000

1.556.940.000

32.956.140.000

32.022.073.891

417.744.752.805

7.419.900.834,81

186.960.666.881,48

20

-1.027.472.720

290.000

32.520.600.000

340.000

1.604.120.000

34.124.720.000

33.097.247.280

450.842.000.085

7.100.955.074,03

194.061.621.955,51

21

-1.130.219.991

300.000

33.642.000.000

350.000

1.651.300.000

35.293.300.000

34.163.080.009

485.005.080.094

6.786.692.199,29

200.848.314.154,79

22

-1.243.241.991

310.000

34.763.400.000

360.000

1.698.480.000

36.461.880.000

35.218.638.009

520.223.718.103

6.478.134.132,48

207.326.448.287,27

23

-1.367.566.190

320.000

35.884.800.000

370.000

1.745.660.000

37.630.460.000

36.262.893.810

556.486.611.913

6.176.125.068,49

213.502.573.355,77

24

-1.504.322.809

330.000

37.006.200.000

380.000

1.792.840.000

38.799.040.000

37.294.717.191

593.781.329.105

5.881.352.186,09

219.383.925.541,85

25

340.000 -1.654.755.090 9 years 1.3 months

38.127.600.000

390.000

1.840.020.000

39.967.620.000

38.312.864.910

632.094.194.015

5.594.364.265,44

224.978.289.807,29

10

Payback

Payback 9.09 years Source: financial forecast

OR

Note: *) 10% increase in the operational cost is an assumption on the growth of the Regional Minimum Wage (UMR) rate per annum.

95 94

DORMITORIES While, if UIN Jakarta is willing to solve the problem by building student dormitories, the established Ma‘had ‗Aly might be a standard, as its location in the same area, that is Jakarta, in which the price of the land and other costs such as labor costs and the like are relatively the same. According to www.uinjkt.ac.id, accessed 27 march 2013, Ma‘had Aly UIN Jakarta was built by spending Rp 5.3 miliar by construction period = 4 months. First step

: 29 rooms @ 4 students, plus living room, auditorium, library, fitness room, kitchen, and bathroom in each floor.

Second step

: 24 rooms @ 4 students, plus mushalla in each floor.

Hence, the capacity is (29 + 24) rooms x 4 students = 53 rooms x 4 students = 212 students. The need of UIN Jakarta is 9,739 students. Then, the total cost needed is around: (9,739 students / 212 students) x Rp5,300,000,000 = 45.93867 x Rp5,300,000,000 = Rp243,475,000,000. Table 4.66 Forecasted Operational Cost Detail Annual cost Usage of Electricity, Water, and Facilities

Wage of Employee

Maintenance Costs

2353 rooms (@ 4 students or less) 1 manager 20 securities 4 technicians 50 office boys

Unit Cost

Period (months)

400.000

12

11.294.400.000

3.200.000 2.200.000 2.200.000 2.200.000 Lump-sum

12 12 12 12 12

38.400.000 528.000.000 105.600.000 1.320.000.000 100.000.000 13.386.400.000

Total Derived and reconstructed from Hasil analisis, 2011, I Nyoman Sugita, 2011: 59

Price (Rp)

Using straight-line method, the annual depreciation is then, (Rp243,475,000,000 – Rp 0) x 1/25 = Rp9,739,000,000. 96

Table 4.67 Payback Period and Discounted Payback Period of Dormitories rate: fee fee increase students

Year

Initial Investment (Rp) 1

0

-243,475,000,000

1

0.08 2,000,000 Rp500,000 9739 Operational Cost (Rp) *) increase 10% per annum 2 -13.386.400.000

2

-14.725.040.000

Economic: Moderate: Deluxe:

annually

Annual Payment per Student Economic Moderate Deluxe

50% 30% 20%

4869.5 2921.7 1947.8

≈ 4870 ≈ 2922 ≈ 1948

students students students

Economic

Revenue Moderate

Deluxe

Total Revenue

students students students

Undiscounted Net Inflow

Accumulated Net Inflow

Discounted Net Inflow

Accumulated Discounted-Net-Inflow (Rp)

11 -

12 -

13 -

3 -

4 -

5 -

6 -

7 -

8 -

9 -

10

2.400.000

6.000.000

10.000.000

11.686.800.000

17.530.200.000

19.478.000.000

48.695.000.000

35.308.600.000

35.308.600.000

32.693.148.148,15

32.693.148.148,15

10.500.000

14.121.550.000

18.991.050.000

20.451.900.000

53.564.500.000

38.839.460.000

74.148.060.000

33.298.576.817,56

65.991.724.965,71

2.900.000

6.500.000

-

3

-16.197.544.000

3.400.000

7.000.000

11.000.000

16.556.300.000

20.451.900.000

21.425.800.000

58.434.000.000

42.236.456.000

116.384.516.000

33.528.660.519,23

99.520.385.484,94

4

-17.817.298.400

3.900.000

7.500.000

11.500.000

18.991.050.000

21.912.750.000

22.399.700.000

63.303.500.000

45.486.201.600

161.870.717.600

33.433.716.066,32

132.954.101.551,25

5

-19.599.028.240

4.400.000

8.000.000

12.000.000

21.425.800.000

23.373.600.000

23.373.600.000

68.173.000.000

48.573.971.760

210.444.689.360

33.058.628.993,05

166.012.730.544,30

6

-21.558.931.064

4.900.000

8.500.000

12.500.000

23.860.550.000

24.834.450.000

24.347.500.000

73.042.500.000

51.483.568.936

261.928.258.296

32.443.381.427,01

198.456.111.971,31

7

-23.714.824.170 -26.086.306.587

5.400.000 5.900.000

9.000.000 9.500.000

13.000.000 13.500.000

26.295.300.000 28.730.050.000

26.295.300.000 27.756.150.000

25.321.400.000 26.295.300.000

77.912.000.000 82.781.500.000

54.197.175.830 56.695.193.413

316.125.434.126 372.820.627.538

31.623.531.546,90

230.079.643.518,22

30.630.648.901,63

260.710.292.419,84

9

-28.694.937.246

6.400.000

10.000.000

14.000.000

31.164.800.000

29.217.000.000

27.269.200.000

87.651.000.000

58.956.062.754

431.776.690.292

29.492.709.498,73

290.203.001.918,58

10

-31.564.430.971

6.900.000

10.500.000

14.500.000

33.599.550.000

30.677.850.000

28.243.100.000

92.520.500.000

60.956.069.029

492.732.759.321

28.234.454.233,56

318.437.456.152,14

11

-34.720.874.068

7.400.000

11.000.000

15.000.000

36.034.300.000

32.138.700.000

29.217.000.000

97.390.000.000

62.669.125.932

555.401.885.253

26.877.713.921,96

345.315.170.074,10

12

-38.192.961.475

7.900.000

11.500.000

15.500.000

38.469.050.000

33.599.550.000

30.190.900.000

102.259.500.000

64.066.538.525

619.468.423.779

25.441.703.917,23

370.756.873.991,33

13

-42.012.257.622

8.400.000

12.000.000

16.000.000

40.903.800.000

35.060.400.000

31.164.800.000

107.129.000.000

65.116.742.378

684.585.166.156

23.943.291.033,76

394.700.165.025,09

14

-46.213.483.384

8.900.000

12.500.000

16.500.000

43.338.550.000

36.521.250.000

32.138.700.000

111.998.500.000

65.785.016.616

750.370.182.772

22.397.235.263,06

417.097.400.288,15

15

-50.834.831.723

9.400.000

13.000.000

17.000.000

45.773.300.000

37.982.100.000

33.112.600.000

116.868.000.000

66.033.168.277

816.403.351.049

20.816.408.552,01

437.913.808.840,15

16

-55.918.314.895

9.900.000

13.500.000

17.500.000

48.208.050.000

39.442.950.000

34.086.500.000

121.737.500.000

65.819.185.105

882.222.536.154

19.211.992.714,76

457.125.801.554,92

17

-61.510.146.385

10.400.000

14.000.000

18.000.000

50.642.800.000

40.903.800.000

35.060.400.000

126.607.000.000

65.096.853.615

947.319.389.770

17.593.658.369,04

474.719.459.923,95

18

-67.661.161.023

10.900.000

14.500.000

18.500.000

53.077.550.000

42.364.650.000

36.034.300.000

131.476.500.000

63.815.338.977

1.011.134.728.747

15.969.726.621,70

490.689.186.545,65

19

-74.427.277.125

11.400.000

15.000.000

19.000.000

55.512.300.000

43.825.500.000

37.008.200.000

136.346.000.000

61.918.722.875

1.073.053.451.621

14.347.315.077,31

505.036.501.622,96

20

-81.870.004.838

11.900.000

15.500.000

19.500.000

57.947.050.000

45.286.350.000

37.982.100.000

141.215.500.000

59.345.495.162

1.132.398.946.783

12.732.469.604,54

517.768.971.227,50

21

-90.057.005.322

12.400.000

16.000.000

20.000.000

60.381.800.000

46.747.200.000

38.956.000.000

146.085.000.000

56.027.994.678

1.188.426.941.462

11.130.283.169,15

528.899.254.396,66

22

-99.062.705.854

12.900.000

16.500.000

20.500.000

62.816.550.000

48.208.050.000

39.929.900.000

150.954.500.000

51.891.794.146

1.240.318.735.608

9.545.002.926,13

538.444.257.322,79

23

-108.968.976.439

13.400.000

17.000.000

21.000.000

65.251.300.000

49.668.900.000

40.903.800.000

155.824.000.000

46.855.023.561

1.287.173.759.169

7.980.126.658,19

546.424.383.980,98

24

-119.865.874.083

13.900.000

17.500.000

21.500.000

67.686.050.000

51.129.750.000

41.877.700.000

160.693.500.000

40.827.625.917

1.328.001.385.086

6.438.489.550,87

552.862.873.531,85

25

-131.852.461.491 14.400.000 OR 7 years 1.4 months

18.000.000

22.000.000

70.120.800.000

52.590.600.000

42.851.600.000

165.563.000.000

33.710.538.509

1.361.711.923.594

4.922.342.206,51

557.785.215.738,36

8

Payback

Payback 7.117 years Source: financial forecast

Note: *) 10% increase in the operational cost is an assumption on the growth of the Regional Minimum Wage (UMR) rate per annum.

97

98

Meanwhile, as both projects are assumed under perpetuity investment, which means that it has the same amount of cash flow every year forever (time without end; eternity), it could be compared between both by using Perpetuity formula revealed by Essentials of Corporate Finance (Ross et.al., 2007: 131132), as the following. Perpetuity PV = C/r  C/r = 100,200,000,000/0.08 = 1,252,500,000,000 (parking building)  C/r = 235,250,000,000/0.08 = 2,940,625,000,000 (dormitories)

99

CHAPTER V CONCLUSION, IMPLICATION, AND RECOMMENDATION A. Conclusion The analysis of the survey results shows that: 1.

Motorcycle as means of transport is used by 42.6% of the respondents. Public transportation has the second priority as transportation-means (27.8% of the respondents)

2.

Faster transportation is preferred by the respondents rather than cheaper one.

3.

―Other‖ means of transport such as bajaj, ojek, and andong/delman, are taken for distances of 6.6 km. The costs in average amount to Rp8,000 per ride. In general, the ―other‖ means of transport are 4 times a week to the campus. While, in the other hand, the average frequency of the overall respondents to travel to Campus by using motorcycles, public transportations, cars, bicycles, or walking on foot, indicate 5 times a week.

4.

There are 7.41% of the respondents consisting of motorcycle and car users who are not maintaining their vehicles.

5.

In average, the respondents spend Rp149,715.19 ( Rp150,000) per year for maintenance, what sense Rp12,500 per month (which is meaning Rp416.67 if traced into daily-basis).

6.

The average distance per ride is indicated by respondents with 5.6 km, hence the daily distance per day is 11.2 km.

100

7.

If the time spent amid traffic jam is included, averagely, respondents spent 68.06 minutes for single travel (not return) to campus. While, if the traffic is fluent and not jammed by congestions, they spend in average only 52.72 minutes. It means, averagely 15.34 minutes are spent in the traffic jam.

8.

In average, going to the Campus by motorcycle is 38.27 minutes faster than by car.

9.

The respondents whose family own a motorcycle amount to 92.3%. Whereas 42.6% of the respondents currently come by motorcycles to campus. It means there are another 49.7% (= 92.3% - 42.6%) potential motorcycle-users, who could come to Campus by motorcycle.

10. There are 73.70% of the respondents owning motorcycles, while, 40.2% indicate that their family owns a car. The 73.70% owning motorcycle are consisting of 55.1% who own one motorcycle and 18.60% who own more than one motorcycle. While, the 40.2% indicate to own a family car are consisting of 35.5% of respondents indicate that their family owns one car and 4.70% of respondents‘ families own more than one car. 11. Respondents would rather prefer to bike at (inside) the campus, than having the bike as means of transport from home to the Campus. 12. The average transportation costs of respondents amount to Rp8,162.88 per day. 13. The majority of respondents prefer to choose UIN to become car-free (no car allowed to enter the campus) rather than motorcycle-free (motorcycle is forbiden to enter the campus). 101

14. Most respondents support the provision of new gardens and more vegetation in the campus. 15. The estimated total time spent by students during the 4 years program in the traffic jam (waiting) amounts to 163.63 hours. Per day these are 15.34 minutes, which means 22.54% of total travel time to Campus the student is waiting in traffic jam. If the 22.54% is traced to the total average transportation costs of Rp5,224,245.76 (for the 4 years study period), it would be loss of 22.54% x Rp5,224,245.76 = Rp1,177,489.42, in comparison to total transportation costs of the 4 year-study-period. 16. The probability of new car users is less than that of new motorcycle users, because the preference of the respondents is on the speed. 17. It is very likely that those who currently do not come by their own vehicles to Campus, would more likely prefer a motorcycle than a car. B. Implication 1. Respondents whose family has motorcycle in their house are amounted to 73.7% respondents + 18.6% respondents = 92.3% respondents. Meanwhile, the respondents currently using motorcycle are 42.6% respondents. It remains 49.7% leaving their motorcycle in at home. This means that there are 49.7% of the respondents with the potentiality of becoming new motorcycle users. This signifies an increase 116.58% of the current motorcycle users. If all respondents owning motorcycles would come to Campus by motorcycle, there would be twice of the bulk of motorcycles that currently are often carried to the campus. The impact 102

that possibly happens is that all empty space in the campus will be all covered by motorcycles, even those motorcycles would not all be accommodated again by the available space within the campus. It even could become worse, if thousands of new students would come to the Campus by motorcycle, because in the in the same time, the number of students that will graduated from the campus is much smaller than the number of new students. 2. The number of motorcycles is growing faster than the number of cars at the Campus. Due to the fact that respondents prefer rather ―faster‖ transportation than ―cheaper‖ one, it is very likely that the amount of motorcycles coming in to the campus will increase. 3. The majority of the respondents support to implementation of new gardens and vegetations in the campus. The majority of respondents also would prefer to bike inside the campus. This contributes to the vision to make UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Campus to become a Green Campus. 4. It is realized that UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta (UIN Jakarta) needs wider area to build a huge particular parking building outside the Campus, or to build more dormitories with such wide capacity as suggested by this research. But, in accordance with http://www.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/arsipberita-utama/2439-uin-jakarta-pasang-plang-di-atas-tanah-trigunautama.html, UIN Jakarta owns the 3,390 m2 area in the north of its campus, which is now in dispute against Yayasan Perguruan Islam Triguna

Utama.

Besides,

according

to 103

http://www.bantenposnews.com/berita-876-uin-syarif-hidayatullahhadapi-2-gugatan-perdata.html, the 96,250 m2 area of the ―Komplek Dosen UIN Jakarta‖ is still under the right of UIN Jakarta. This area allows UIN Jakarta to build more dormitories to accommodate the suttlestudents. 5. In the perspective of business opportunity, the building of more dormitories might increase the number of students living around the Campus. This might lead to the increase of students consumptions, which are positif externalities, that allows the business activity (such as photocopy, warteg, kosan, internet rental, laundry, etc.) around the Campus and the dormitories to boost and rocketing.

C. Recommendation Considering

the

conclusions

and

implications

above,

the

recommendations to the Campus management of UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta are as the following. 1. To build more dormitories, with the required capacity, as discussed in the Chapter IV. This recommendation is in accordance with the financial analysis (feasibility study) conducted, resulted that the discounted payback-period of the dormitories building is 10 years faster than parking building, which might be better in the investors‘ point of view if UIN Jakarta‘s management is going to let the dormitories built are getting funded by investors (from Islamic Development Bank, or others).

104

2. To build special parking building outside or at the entrance of the campus area, so that there are cars and motorcycles in the campus area or at least that the traffic can be channeled in a certain area at the Campus. This is recommended to be conducted, when funding the dormitories building is not currently possible. 3. To hold regular emission tests minimally once a year for a certain period, to ensure the exhaust quality of the vehicles is within a good standard. 4. To provide bikes and electric bikes in the campus. 5. To redesign the green path in the campus. 6. To green the Campus with special vegetation that is able to absorb dust and CO2.

105

REFERENCES

A. Tresna Sastrawijaya, M.Sc., ―Pencemaran Lingkungan”, Rineka Cipta, Jakarta, 2000. Abu Fatiah Al-Adnani, ―Global Warming: Sebuah Isyarat Dekatnya Akhir Zaman dan Kehancuran Dunia”, Granada Mediatama, Surakarta, 2008. Aula Ahmad Hafidh Saiful Fikri, ―Cost-Benefit Analysis (Modul Mata Kuliah Evaluasi Proyek)‖, FEIS UNY, Yogyakarta, 2010. Barry, John, ―Towards a Model of Green Political Economy: from Ecological Modernisation to Economic Security‖, Int. J. Green Economics, Vol. 1, Nos. 3 / 4, Inderscience Enterprise Ltd., Belfast, UK, 2007. Berman, Jeff, ―Maximizing Project Value: Defining, Managing, and Measuring for Optimal Return‖, AMACOM, New York, 2007. Blocher, Edward J., Kung H. Chen, and Thomas W. Lin, ―Manajemen Biaya: dengan Tekanan Stratejik”, buku 1 (translated from Cost Management: a Strategic Emphasis), Salemba Empat, Jakarta, 2000. Brian McMahon, ―Student Housing Options in the Midway”, Russell Stark, University UNITED, December 14, 2001. Diehl, P. L. and L. R. Gay, ―Research Methods for Business and Management‖, Macmillan, New York, 1992. Douglas, Evan J., ―Managerial Economics: Analysis and Strategy”, 4th edition, Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, 1992. Hammer, DBA, CPA, Adolph Matz, Ph.D., Milton F. Usry, Ph.D., CPA, and Lawrence H., ―Akuntansi Biaya: Perencanaan dan Pengendalian”, jilid I, edisi 9 (translated by Alfonsus Sirait, S.E. and Herman Wibowo from Cost Accounting: Planning and Control, 9th edition), Erlangga, Jakarta, 1997. Hammitt, James K. and Lisa A. Robinson, ―Behavioral Economics and the Conduct of Benefit-Cost Analysis: Towards Principles and Standard”, Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis: Vol. 2: Iss. 2, Article 5, Berkeley Electronic Press, 2011. I G Narendra Kasuma, ―Analisis Kelayakan Finansial Rencana Pembangunan Gedung Parkir Bertingkat di Pasar Lokitasari”, Tesis, Denpasar, Program Pascasarjana Universitas Udayana, 2011.

106

I Nyoman Sugita, ―Kajian Kelayakan Finansial Pembangunan Gedung Parkir Universitas Udayana di Jalan Sudirman Denpasar”, Tesis, Denpasar, Program Magister Program Studi Teknik Sipil Program Pascasarjana Universitas Udayana, 2011. Iman Soeharto, ―Manajemen Proyek: dari Konseptual Sampai Operasional‖, Erlangga, Jakarta, 1995 Keller, Philip Kotler, and Kevin Lane, ―Marketing Management”, global edition, 14e. Pearson Education, publishing as Prentice Hall, United States of America, 2012. Khusnul Khotimah, Ir., MM., Ir. Sutawi, MP., Ir. Adi Sutanto, MM., Ir. Maleha, MS., & Ir. Evita S. Hani, MP., ―Evaluasi Proyek dan Perencanaan Usaha‖, Ghalia Indonesia, Jakarta, 2002. Libby, Libby, and Short, ―Financial Accounting”, fifth edition, New York, McGraw-Hill, 2007. Lily Surayya Eka Putri, M.Env.Stud., et. al. (2011: 32) within Strategi Pengembangan UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta Menuju Eco-Campus. Ludfi Djakfar, Amelia Kusuma Indriastuti, Akhmad Sya‘ban Nasution, ―Studi Karakteristik dan Model Pemilihan Moda Angkutan Mahasiswa Menuju Kampus (Sepeda Motor atau Angkutan Umum) di Kota Malang, Malang, Jurusan Teknik Sipil, Fakultas Teknik, Universitas Brawijaya, 2010. Maringan Masry Simbolon, ―Ekonomi Transportasi‖, Jakarta, Ghalia Indonesia, 2003. Mazzeo, Nicolas A. and Laura E. Venegas, ―Air Pollution Dispersion inside a Street Canyon of Gottinger Strasse (Hannover, Germany): New Results of the Analysis of Full Scale Data‖, Int. J. Environment and Pollution, Vol. 40, Nos. 1/2/3, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd., Buenos Aires, Argentina, 2010. Muchtarudin Siregar, ―Beberapa Masalah Ekonomi dan Pengangkutan‖, Lembaga Penerbit FE UI, Jakarta, 1981.

Management

McLead, Raymond Jr. and Eleanor Jordan, ―System Development: A Project Management Approach‖, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 2002. Mudrajad Kuncoro, Ph.D., ―Metode Riset untuk Bisnis & Ekonomi‖, Erlangga, Jakarta, 2003. Mudrajad Kuncoro, Ph.D., ―Metode Riset untuk Bisnis & Ekonomi‖, edisi 3, Erlangga, Jakarta, 2009. 107

Mulyadi, Drs., M.Sc., ―Akuntansi Biaya”, edisi ke-4, BPFE, Yogyakarta, 1990. M. Nur Nasution, Drs., M.S.Tr., ―Manajemen Transportasi‖, Ghalia Indonesia, Jakarta, 2004. Niswonger, Warren, Reeve, and Fess, ―Prinsip-Prinsip Akuntansi‖, jilid 1, edisi 19, Jakarta, Erlangga, 1999. Panitat, Ratanawichit, ―The Appropriate Walkway towards Sustainable Transportation in the University Community: a Case Study of Kasetsart University, Bangkhen Campus‖, Faculty of Architecture, Kasetsart University, Bangkok, Thailand. Peter Lewin, as as an Assistant Professor of Economics and Political Economy at The University of Texas at Dallas, within Journal ―Pollution Externalities: Social Cost and Strict Liability‖, Cato Journal, Vol. 2, No. 1 (Spring 1982). Rajan, Madhav V., Michael W. Maher, and William N. Lanen, ―Fundamentals of Cost Accounting‖, McGraw-Hill, New York, 2006. Richard N. Langlois, ―Cost-Benefit Analysis, Environmentalism, and Rights‖, derived from http://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/catojournal/1982/5/cj2n1-9.pdf. Richard N. Langlois. Cost-benefit analysis, Environmentalism, and rights. Cato Journal, vol. 2, No. I (Spring 1982). Copyright © Cato Institute. Robert Libby, Patricia A. Libby, and Daniel G. Short, ―Financial Accounting”, third edition, New York, McGraw-Hill, 2001. Ross, Westerfield, Jordan, ―Fundamentals of Corporate Finance”, Alternate Edition, Ninth Edition, McGraw-Hill International Edition, New York, 2010. Ross, Westerfield, Jaffe, ―Corporate Finance‖, 6th edition, Revised Printing, McGraw-Hill, New York, 2002. Ross, Westerfield, Jordan, ―Essentials of Corporate Finance”, fifth edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, 2007. Rudy Setiawan, ―Studi Kelayakan Pembangunan Gedung Parkir dan Analisis „Willingness to Pay‟: Studi Kasus di Universitas Kristen Petra”, Surabaya.

108

Rustian Kamaluddin, Prof., Drs., H., ―Ekonomi Transportasi: Karakteristik, Teori, dan Kebijakan‖, Ghalia Indonesia, Jakarta, 2003. Saaty, Thomas L., ―Fundamentals of Decision Making and Priority Theory, with The Analytic Hierarchy Process”, Vol. VI of the AHP Series, RWS Publications, Pittsburgh, 1994. Sharp, Ansel M., Charles A. Register, and Paul W. Grimes, ―Economics of Social Issues”, fifteenth edition, McGraw-Hill Higher Education, New York, 2002. Sheridan Titman, Arthur J. Keon, John D. Martin, ―Financial Management: Principles and Applications‖, Eleventh Edition, Pearson, Boston, 2011. Suad Husnan, MBA and Drs. Suwarsono, ―Studi Kelayakan Proyek: Konsep, Teknik, dan Penyusunan Laporan‖, BPFE Yogyakarta and LPM2M AMPYKPN Kampus Balapan Yogyakarta, Yogyakarta, 1984. S. Eko Putro Widoyoko, Prof. Dr., M.Pd., ―Teknik Penyusunan Instrumen Penelitian”, Pustaka Pelajar, Yogyakarta, 2012. Sudjana, MA, M.Sc., Dr., Prof., ―Metoda Statistika”, edisi 6, Tarsito, Bandung, 2005. Sugiyono, Dr., Prof., ―Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan R&D‖, Alfabeta, Bandung, 2012. Steiner, George A., ―Top Management Planning‖, Taipei, 1976. Stijn Van Mol, ―Analysis of Motorcycle Technical Conditions towards a Sustainable Campus‖, Hoboken, Departement Industriële Wetenschappen en Technologie, Industriële Wetenschappen Elektromechanica Afstudeerrichting, Karel de Grote-Hogeschool, June 2012. Stijn Van Mol, ―Needs Analysis of UIN Jakarta‟s Green Campus”, March 2012. Surna Thahja Djajadiningrat, et. al., ―Ekonomi Hijau (Green Economy)”, Rekayasa Sains, Bandung, 2011. Tribe, ―Technology Assessment and the Fourth Discontinuity: The Limits of Instrumental Rationality,‖ Southern California Law Review, 46(1973): 627-631, within Richard N. Langlois. Cost-benefit analysis, Environmentalism, and rights. Cato Journal, vol. 2, No. I (Spring 1982). Copyright © Cato Institute. Uma Sekaran and Roger Bougie, “Research Methods for Business: A Skill Building Approach”, fifth edition, John Wiley & Sons Ltd , Chichester, West Sussex, United Kingdom, 2009. 109

Van Derbeck, Edward J., ―Principles of Cost Accounting”, international edition, 15e, South-Western, USA, 2010. Walker, Gordon, ―Modern Competitive Strategy”, second edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, 2007. Wiji Lestari, ―Pengaruh Status Sosial Ekonomi terhadap Pemilihan Moda Transportasi untuk Perjalanan Kerja (Studi Kasus Karyawan PT SSSWI Kabupaten Wonosobo)”, Tesis, Semarang, Program Pasca Sarjana Megister Teknik Sipil Universitas Diponegoro, 2007. Williams, Haka, Bettner, and Carcello, ―Financial Accounting”, 12th edition, New York, McGraw-Hill, 2006. Wisnu Arya Wardhana, ―Dampak Pemanasan Global: Bencana mengancam Umat Manusia. Sebab, Akibat, dan Usaha Penaggulangannya‖, Andi Offset, Yogyakarta, 2010. Yulius, ―Karakteristik Lalu Lintas Kendaraan Bermotor di Kawasan Ciputat‖, Research Center for Maritime Territory & Non Living Resources, Agency for Marine & Fisheries Research, Ministry of Marine Affairs & FisheriesRepublic of Indonesia, Jakarta, 2003. Yuri

V. Yevdokimov, ―Measuring Economic benefits Transportation”, University of New Brunswick.

of

Intermodal

----. Transportation Cost and Benefit Analysis II – Air Pollution Costs. Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org/tca/tca0510.pdf), 2011. ----. Greening the Campus: Where Practice and Education Go Hand in Hand. A collaborative effort by US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 1, new England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission and Environmental Training Center (NEIWPCC/NEIETC) and the Northeast Partnership for Environmental Technology Education (NEPETE). Visit http://www.neiwpcc.org/neiwpcc_docs/greenbk.pdf. .---. Buku Panduan Penulisan Skripsi FEB-UIN Jakarta. Jakarta: UIN Syarif Hidayatullah, 2011. ---, Pedoman Akademik 2008-2009, Jakarta: Biro Administrasi Akademik dan Kemahasiswaan Universitas Islam Negeri (UIN) Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta, 2008.

110

------------, ―Student Housing Market Demand Assessment”, City of San Antonio, Keyser Marston Associates, Inc., October 2012. ---------, ―Petunjuk Pelaksanaan Undang-Undang RI No. 14 tentang Lalu Lintas & Angkutan Jalan”, Bantuan Pelayanan & Konsultasi Hukum Indonesia, LVRI, 1993. http://bangazul.blogspot.com/2012/09/green-campus.html, derived from the blog of Dr. Arif Zulkifli Nasution, an environmentalist, accessed on Thursday, January 3, 2013. http://www.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/component/content/article/1-headline/1672-uinjakarta-gelar-pameran-pendidikan-di-surabaya.html, accessed on March 26, 2012 http://www.thefreedictionary.com/benefit http://www.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/tentang-uin.html, supported by a correction in http://www.fitk-uinjkt.ac.id/component/content/article/23-agenda/147pelaksanaan-wisuda-sarjana-ke-85-.html, accessed 27th March. http://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universitas_Islam_Negeri_Syarif_Hidayatullah_Jakar ta, accessed 27th March, 2013. http://www.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/component/content/article/1-headline/1555rektor-harapkan-kontribusi-alumni.html, accessed 1 April 2013. http://www.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/component/content/article/1-headline/2161-uinjakarta-luluskan-841-sarjana-baru.html, accessed 1 April 2013. http://www.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/arsip-berita-utama/2262-sebanyak-1181peserta-akan-ikuti-wisuda-sarjana-ke-87-.html, accessed 1 April 2013. http://www.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/arsip-berita-utama/2418-ribuan-calonwisudawan-ke-89-ikuti-gladi-resik.html, accessed 1 April 2013. http://ekonomi.kompasiana.com/bisnis/2010/09/06/anda-ditipu-saat-parkir-olehpemda-dki-jakarta-250524.html, accessed March 24, 2013. http://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/lumpsumdistribution.asp, accessed 5 April 2013. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/lump+sum, accessed 5 April 2013. http://www.bi.go.id/web/en/Moneter/BI+Rate/Data+BI+Rate/, accessed 8th April 2013. 111

http://keuanganlsm.com/article/perpajakan/penyusutan-depresiasi-menurutperpajakan/, accessed 5th April 2013. http://www.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/arsip-berita-utama/943-uin-jakarta-segerabangun-mahad-aly-.html, accessed 27 march 2013. http://www.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/component/content/article/1-headline/1672-uinjakarta-gelar-pameran-pendidikan-di-surabaya.html, http://www.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/tentang-uin.html, accessed 27th March, 2013. http://www.restrojaksel.info/one-stop-it-solutions/wisuda-sarjana-angkatan-ke-88uin-syarif-hidayatullah-jakarta-ciputat-timur-kota-tangerang-selatan.html, accessed 9th July 2013.

112

Appendix 1: Questionnaire Structure ENGLISH VERSION Tuesday, 6th March 2012 Interviewer: Green Campus Team

The questionnaire aims to study the preference of students at UIN Sharif Hidayatullah Jakarta in choosing alternative transportation to campus. Survey on the campus held on 1 to 8 March 2012. This survey is in the form of structured-interview / questionnaires. Green Campus team will interview or give questionnaires to students, randomly. Anonymity of respondents is kept in data processing. However, for mapping the interview / questionnaire, respondents are expected to include their name, major, and semester. Identity of respondent: Name: ………………..

Major/Semester: ………………….

Choose only one answer for each question! 1. What do you usually chose as a. By motorcycle your means of transportation to b. By public transportation UIN, mostly? c. By bicycle d. Walking on foot e. By my own car f. Other 2. What is the reason for your a. Fast transportation choice? b. Cheap c. Usual d. It is hot for biking or by public transportation e. I proud with my own vehicle f. To avoid traffic jam 3. Would you prefer the public a. Yes, I will take a bus or other public transportation, if it is cheaper transportation than private vehicle? b. No, I prefer my motorcycle c. No, I prefer my own car d. Maybe 4. Would you prefer the public a. Yes, I will take a bus or other public transportation, if it is faster than transportation private vehicle? b. No, I prefer my motorcycle c. No, I prefer my own car d. Maybe 113

5.

Do you often maintain your vehicle, especially motorcycle? a1 What is maintained?

a. b. a. b. c. d. e. a. b. c. d.

Yes No Light Brake Filter Spark-plug All For safety To extend the usage To keep it in good condition To prevent the decrease of the exhaust gas quality a. Rp20.000 – Rp50.000 b. Rp50.000 – Rp100.000 c. Rp100.000 – Rp200.000 d. More than Rp200.000 a. Unnecessary b. Expensive c. Not thinkable / Never thought about a. Always in the official fuel station b. Mostly in the official fuel station c. Sometimes in the official fuel station, sometimes in others d. Mostly from the street sellers a. Less than 1 kilometer b. 1 – 3 kilometers c. 3 – 5 kilometers d. 5 – 10 kilometers e. More than 10 kilometers a. 5-30 minutes b. 30 minutes -1 hour c. 1-2 hours d. 2-4 hours e. More than 4 hours a. 5-30 minutes b. 30 minutes -1 hour c. 1-2 hours d. 2-4 hours e. More than 4 hours a. once b. twice c. 3 times d. 4 times e. 5 times or more a. Yes b. No

b1 If yes, why?

c1 How much is spent for maintenance work a year?

a2 If no, why not?

6.

Where do you refuel?

7.

What‘s your daily distance from your accommodation to UIN?

8.

How much time do you spend in traffic on your ride to UIN? (Back and forth are summed)

9.

How much time do you spend in traffic on your ride to UIN, if there is no daily traffic jam? (Back and forth are summed)

10.

During lecturing period, how many times in a week do you go to UIN?

11.

Does your family have a motorcycle? 114

12.

Does your family have a car?

13.

What do you think of biking to campus?

14.

What do you think of biking inside campus? (Only for the usage inside the campus)

15.

How much is your weekly transportation costs to campus?

16.

What do you think if there is no car permitted to enter in the campus, but special parking building is provided outside the campus?

17.

What do you think if there is no motorcycle permitted to enter in the campus, but special parking building is provided outside the campus?

18.

What is your opinion on making new garden or green area in the campus?

19.

What is your opinion on adding more green vegetations in the campus area?

c. More than one a. Yes b. No c. More than one a. I like the idea b. I‘m very likely to bike to campus c. I‘m unlikely to bike to campus d. Never thought about by me e. Other opinion a. I like the idea b. If possible, I‘m very likely to bike inside the campus c. Maybe I‘m unlikely to ride it d. Never thought about by me to bike inside the campus e. Other opinion a. Rp0 – Rp5.000 b. Rp5.000 – Rp20.000 c. Rp20.000 – Rp50.000 d. Rp50.000 – Rp100.000 e. More than Rp100.000 a. Indeed, it should be no car permitted to enter in the campus b. It‘s a good idea c. It‘s unlikely to be no car entering in the campus d. Never thought about by me e. Other opinion a. Indeed, it should be no motorcycle permitted to enter in the campus b. It‘s a good idea c. It‘s unlikely to be no motorcycle entering in the campus d. Never thought about by me e. Other opinion a. Indeed, it should be b. It‘s a good idea c. It looks impossible d. Never thought about by me e. Other opinion a. Good, it will be beautiful b. I like the idea, more vegetations will reduce pollutants in the campus c. It looks impossible d. Never thought about by me e. Other opinion 115

Appendix 2: Result of Questionnaire Dissemination (Absolute and Relative Number)

TOTAL Question 1.

What do you usually chose as your means of transportation to UIN, mostly?

a) By motorcycle b) By public transportation c) By bicycle d) Walking on foot e) By my own car f) Other 2. What is the reason for your transportation choice? a) Fast b) Cheap c) Usual d) It is hot for biking or by public transportation e) I proud with my own vehicle f) To avoid traffic jam No answer 3. Would you prefer the public transportation, if it is

cheaper than private vehicle? a) Yes, I will take a bus or other public transportation b) No, I prefer my motorcycle c) No, I prefer my own car d) Maybe No answer 4. Would you prefer the public transportation, if it is faster

than private vehicle? a) Yes, I will take a bus other public transportation b) No, I prefer my motorcycle c) No, I prefer my own car d) Maybe No answer 5. Do you often maintain your vehicle, especially

motorcycle? a) Yes b) No No answer a1 If yes, what is maintained? a) Lights b) Brakes c) Filters d) Spark-plug e) All No answer

Respondent

%

891

100.0% 380 248 18 224 16 5

891 246 117 390 12 20 99 7 891

100.0% 331 260 32 247 21

891

37.1% 29.2% 3.6% 27.7% 2.4% 100.0%

415 187 36 226 27 891

46.6% 21.0% 4.0% 25.4% 3.0% 100.0%

444 396 51 891 22 75 22 15 343 414 116

42.6% 27.8% 2.0% 25.1% 1.8% 0.6% 100.0% 27.6% 13.1% 43.8% 1.3% 2.2% 11.1% 0.8%

49.8% 44.4% 5.7% 100.0% 2.5% 8.4% 2.5% 1.7% 38.5% 46.5%

891

b1 If yes, why? a) For safety

100.0% 129

14.5%

33

3.7%

c) To keep it in good condition d) To prevent the decrease of the exhaust gas quality

292 14

32.8% 1.6%

No answer c1 If yes, how much is spent for maintenance work a year?

423

47.5% 100.0%

a) Rp20.000 - Rp50.000

34

3.8%

b) Rp50.000 - Rp100.000

105

11.8%

c) Rp100.000 - Rp200.000

102

11.4%

d) More than Rp200.000

233

26.2%

No answer a2 If no, why not?

417

46.8% 100.0%

113

12.7%

56

6.3%

129 593

14.5% 66.6% 100.0%

a) Always in the official fuel station

486

54.5%

b) Mostly in the official fuel station c) Sometimes in the official fuel station, sometimes in others

152 90

17.1% 10.1%

15

1.7%

148

16.6%

b) To extend the usage

891

891

a) Unnecessary b) Expensive c) Never thought about / Not thinkable No answer 6. Where do you refuel?

891

d) Mostly from the streetsellers No answer 7. What‘s your daily distance from your accommodation

to UIN?

891

a) Less than 1km b) 1km-3km

100.0% 202 136

22.7% 15.3%

85

9.5%

d) 5-10km

172

19.3%

e) More than 10km No answer 8. How much time do you spend in traffic on your ride to

286 10

32.1% 1.1%

c) 3km-5km

UIN? (Back and forth are summed)

891

100.0%

a) 5-30 minutes

318

35.7%

b) 30minutes - 1hour

248

27.8%

c) 1-2hours

176

19.8%

d) 2-4hours

108

12.1%

34

3.8%

7

0.8%

e) More than 4hours No answer 117

9. How much time do you spend in traffic on your ride to

UIN, if there is no daily traffic jam? (Back and forth are summed) a) 5-30 minutes b) 30minutes - 1hour c) 1-2hours d) 2-4hours e) More than 4hours No answer 10. During lecturing period, how many times in a week do

you go to UIN? a) Once b) Twice c) 3 times d) 4 times e) 5 times or more No answer 11. Does your family have a motorcycle? a) Yes b) No c) More than one No answer 12. Does your family have a car? a) Yes b) No c) More than one No answer 13. What do you think of biking to campus? a) I like the idea b) I‘m very likely to bike to campus c) I‘m unlikely to bike to campus d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer 14. What do you think of biking inside campus? (Only for

the usage inside the campus) a) I like the idea b) If possible, I‘m very likely to bike inside the campus c) Maybe I‘m unlikely to ride it d) Never thought about by me to bike inside the campus / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer 118

891

100.0% 392 239 173 62 7 18

891

44.0% 26.8% 19.4% 7.0% 0.8% 2.0% 100.0%

11 25 50 334 466 5 891 657 64 166 4 891 358 485 42 6 891 511 70 120 97 89 4 891

1.2% 2.8% 5.6% 37.5% 52.3% 0.6% 100.0% 73.7% 7.2% 18.6% 0.4% 100.0% 40.2% 54.4% 4.7% 0.7% 100.0% 57.4% 7.9% 13.5% 10.9% 10.0% 0.4% 100.0%

533 217 46

59.8% 24.4% 5.2%

55 33 7

6.2% 3.7% 0.8%

15. How much is your weekly transportation costs to

campus?

891

a) Rp 0 - Rp5,000 b) Rp5,000 - Rp20,000 c) Rp20,000 - Rp50,000 d) Rp50,000 - Rp100,000 e) More than Rp100,000 No answer 16. What do you think if there is no car permitted to enter

in the campus, but special parking building is provided outside the campus?

132 177 294 187 91 10 891

a) Indeed, it should be no car permitted to enter in the campus b) It‘s a good idea c) It‘s unlikely to be no car entering in the campus d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer 17. What do you think if there is no motorcycle permitted

to enter in the campus, but special parking building is provided outside the campus? a) Indeed, it should be no motorcycle permitted to enter in the campus b) It‘s a good idea c) It‘s unlikely to be no motorcycle entering in the campus d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer 18. What is your opinion on making new garden or green

area in the campus? a) Indeed, it should be b) It‘s a good idea c) It looks impossible d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer 19. What is your opinion on adding

more green

a) Good, it will be beautiful b) I like the idea, more vegetations will reduce pollutants in the campus c) It looks impossible d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer

14.8% 19.9% 33.0% 21.0% 10.2% 1.1% 100.0%

149 332 227 131 48 4 891

16.7% 37.3% 25.5% 14.7% 5.4% 0.4% 100.0%

90 256 399 103 38 5 891

10.1% 28.7% 44.8% 11.6% 4.3% 0.6% 100.0%

580 249 20 17 19 6

vegetations in the campus area?

119

100.0%

891

65.1% 27.9% 2.2% 1.9% 2.1% 0.7% 100.0%

371

41.6%

452 18 17 27 6

50.7% 2.0% 1.9% 3.0% 0.7%

Appendix 3: Result of Questionnaire Dissemination (Absolute and Relative Number)

MOTORCYCLE Question

Respondent

%

380

42.6%

a) By motorcycle b) By public transportation c) By bicycle d) Walking on foot e) By my own car f) Other

380

2. What is the reason for your transportation choice?

380

42.6% 42.6% 21.3% 3.6% 6.5% 0.1% 1.5% 9.7% -

1.

What do you usually chose as your means of transportation to UIN, mostly?

0 0 0 0 0

a) Fast b) Cheap c) Usual d) It is hot for biking or by public transportation e) I proud with my own vehicle f) To avoid traffic jam No answer

3. Would you prefer the public transportation, if it is cheaper than private vehicle?

190 32 58 1 13 86 0 380

a) Yes, I will take a bus or other public transportation b) No, I prefer my motorcycle c) No, I prefer my own car d) Maybe No answer

4. Would you prefer the public transportation, if it is faster than private vehicle?

75 208 3 91 3 380

a) Yes, I will take a bus other public transportation b) No, I prefer my motorcycle c) No, I prefer my own car d) Maybe No answer

5. Do you often maintain your vehicle, especially motorcycle? a) Yes b) No No answer a1 If yes, what is maintained? a) Lights b) Brakes c) Filters d) Spark-plug e) All No answer

42.6%

42.6% 134 140 8 90 8

380

15.0% 15.7% 0.9% 10.1% 0.9% 42.6%

321 59 0 380 15 44 16 4 244 57 120

8.4% 23.3% 0.3% 10.2% 0.3%

36.0% 6.6% 42.6% 1.7% 4.9% 1.8% 0.4% 27.4% 6.4%

b1 If yes, why? a) For safety b) To extend the usage c) To keep it in good condition d) To prevent the decrease of the exhaust gas quality No answer c1 If yes, how much is spent for maintenance work a

380 84 18 208 8 62 380

year? a) Rp20.000 - Rp50.000 b) Rp50.000 - Rp100.000 c) Rp100.000 - Rp200.000 d) More than Rp200.000 No answer a2 If no, why not? a) Unnecessary b) Expensive c) Never thought about / Not thinkable No answer

25 71 60 168 56

2.8% 7.9% 6.7% 18.9% 6.3%

22 12 29 317

42.6% 2.5% 1.3% 3.3% 35.6%

273 69 30 1 7

42.6% 30.6% 7.7% 3.4% 0.1% 0.8%

380

a) Always in the official fuel station b) Mostly in the official fuel station c) Sometimes in the official fuel station, sometimes in others d) Mostly from the streetsellers No answer

7. What‘s your daily accommodation to UIN?

42.6%

380

6. Where do you refuel?

distance

from

your

380

a) Less than 1km b) 1km-3km c) 3km-5km d) 5-10km e) More than 10km No answer

42.6% 30 40 36 96 175 3

8. How much time do you spend in traffic on your ride to UIN? (Back and forth are summed) a) 5-30 minutes b) 30minutes - 1hour c) 1-2hours d) 2-4hours e) More than 4hours No answer

380

3.3% 4.5% 4.0% 10.8% 19.6% 0.3% 42.6%

92 144 98 33 13 0 121

42.6% 9.4% 2.0% 23.3% 0.9% 6.9%

10.3% 16.2% 10.9% 3.7% 1.5% -

9. How much time do you spend in traffic on your ride to UIN, if there is no daily traffic jam? (Back and forth are summed)

380

a) 5-30 minutes b) 30minutes - 1hour c) 1-2hours d) 2-4hours e) More than 4hours No answer

42.6% 140 145 72 20 2 1

10. During lecturing period, how many times in a week do you go to UIN?

380

a) Once b) Twice c) 3 times d) 4 times e) 5 times or more No answer

42.6% 3 10 24 162 179 2

11. Does your family have a motorcycle?

380

a) Yes b) No c) More than one No answer

291 4 85 0

12. Does your family have a car?

380

a) Yes b) No c) More than one No answer

174 190 14 2

13. What do you think of biking to campus?

380

a) I like the idea b) I‘m very likely to bike to campus c) I‘m unlikely to bike to campus d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer

14. What do you think of biking inside campus? (Only for the usage inside the campus) a) b) c) d)

I like the idea If possible, I‘m very likely to bike inside the campus Maybe I‘m unlikely to ride it Never thought about by me to bike inside the campus / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer 122

15.7% 16.3% 8.1% 2.2% 0.2% 0.1%

199 20 60 51 50 0 380

0.3% 1.1% 2.7% 18.2% 20.1% 0.2% 42.6% 32.7% 0.4% 9.5% 42.6% 19.5% 21.3% 1.6% 0.2% 42.6% 22.3% 2.2% 6.7% 5.7% 5.6% 42.6%

221 97 23

24.8% 10.9% 2.6%

27 11 1

3.0% 1.2% 0.1%

15. How much is your weekly transportation costs to campus?

380

a) Rp 0 - Rp5,000 b) Rp5,000 - Rp20,000 c) Rp20,000 - Rp50,000 d) Rp50,000 - Rp100,000 e) More than Rp100,000 No answer

42.6% 9 92 166 84 28 1

16. What do you think if there is no car permitted to enter in the campus, but special parking building is provided outside the campus?

380

a) Indeed, it should be no car permitted to enter in the campus b) It‘s a good idea c) It‘s unlikely to be no car entering in the campus d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer

17. What do you think if there is no motorcycle permitted to enter in the campus, but special parking building is provided outside the campus?

18. What is your opinion on making new garden or green area in the campus?

380

a) Good, it will be beautiful b) I like the idea, more vegetations will reduce pollutants in the campus c) It looks impossible d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer 123

6.3% 16.4% 12.1% 5.8% 2.0% 42.6%

31 77 205 53 14 0 380

a) Indeed, it should be b) It‘s a good idea c) It looks impossible d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer

19. What is your opinion on adding more green vegetations in the campus area?

42.6% 56 146 108 52 18 0

a) Indeed, it should be no motorcycle permitted to enter in the campus b) It‘s a good idea c) It‘s unlikely to be no motorcycle entering in the campus d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer

1.0% 10.3% 18.6% 9.4% 3.1% 0.1%

3.5% 8.6% 23.0% 5.9% 1.6% 42.6%

261 100 6 6 7 0 380

29.3% 11.2% 0.7% 0.7% 0.8% 42.6%

173

19.4%

182 8 2 15 0

20.4% 0.9% 0.2%

Appendix 4: Result of Questionnaire Dissemination (Absolute and Relative Number)

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION Question

Respondent

1. What do you usually chose as your means of transportation to UIN, mostly?

248

a) By motorcycle b) By public transportation c) By bicycle d) Walking on foot e) By my own car f) Other

27.8% 0 248 0 0 0 0

2. What is the reason for your transportation choice?

248

a) Fast b) Cheap c) Usual d) It is hot for biking or by public transportation e) I proud with my own vehicle f) To avoid traffic jam No answer

3. Would you prefer the public transportation, if it is cheaper than private vehicle?

19 61 158 3 0 5 2 248

a) Yes, I will take a bus or other public transportation b) No, I prefer my motorcycle c) No, I prefer my own car d) Maybe No answer

4. Would you prefer the public transportation, if it is faster than private vehicle?

5. Do you often maintain your vehicle, especially motorcycle? a) Yes b) No No answer a1 If yes, what is maintained? a) Lights b) Brakes c) Filters d) Spark-plug e) All No answer

27.8% 156 19 12 54 7

248

a) Yes, I will take a bus other public transportation b) No, I prefer my motorcycle c) No, I prefer my own car d) Maybe No answer

17.5% 2.1% 1.3% 6.1% 0.8% 27.8%

162 12 10 58 6 248

18.2% 1.3% 1.1% 6.5% 0.7% 27.8%

57 167 24 248 2 12 2 4 46 182 124

27.8% 27.8% 2.1% 6.8% 17.7% 0.3% 0.6% 0.2%

6.4% 18.7% 2.7% 27.8% 0.2% 1.3% 0.2% 0.4% 5.2% 20.4%

b1 If yes, why? a) For safety b) To extend the usage c) To keep it in good condition d) To prevent the decrease of the exhaust gas quality No answer c1 If yes, how much is spent for maintenance work a

248 20 4 32 5 187 248

year? a) Rp20.000 - Rp50.000 b) Rp50.000 - Rp100.000 c) Rp100.000 - Rp200.000 d) More than Rp200.000 No answer a2 If no, why not? a) Unnecessary b) Expensive c) Never thought about / Not thinkable No answer

46 16 49 137

0.4% 2.0% 1.6% 3.3% 20.5% 27.8% 5.2% 1.8% 5.5% 15.4%

120 37 15 4 72

27.8% 13.5% 4.2% 1.7% 0.4% 8.1%

248

248

a) Always in the official fuel station b) Mostly in the official fuel station c) Sometimes in the official fuel station, sometimes in others d) Mostly from the streetsellers No answer

7. What‘s your daily accommodation to UIN?

27.8% 4 18 14 29 183

6. Where do you refuel?

distance

from

your

248

a) Less than 1km b) 1km-3km c) 3km-5km d) 5-10km e) More than 10km No answer

27.8% 13 47 25 63 98 2

8. How much time do you spend in traffic on your ride to UIN? (Back and forth are summed) a) 5-30 minutes b) 30minutes - 1hour c) 1-2hours d) 2-4hours e) More than 4hours No answer

248

1.5% 5.3% 2.8% 7.1% 11.0% 0.2% 27.8%

31 74 65 59 16 3 125

27.8% 2.2% 0.4% 3.6% 0.6% 21.0%

3.5% 8.3% 7.3% 6.6% 1.8% 0.3%

9. How much time do you spend in traffic on your ride to UIN, if there is no daily traffic jam? (Back and forth are summed)

248

a) 5-30 minutes b) 30minutes - 1hour c) 1-2hours d) 2-4hours e) More than 4hours No answer

27.8% 65 63 81 33 2 4

10. During lecturing period, how many times in a week do you go to UIN?

248

a) Once b) Twice c) 3 times d) 4 times e) 5 times or more No answer

27.8% 3 5 13 88 136 3

11. Does your family have a motorcycle?

248

a) Yes b) No c) More than one No answer

175 25 45 3

12. Does your family have a car?

248

a) Yes b) No c) More than one No answer

75 162 9 2

13. What do you think of biking to campus?

248

a) I like the idea b) I‘m very likely to bike to campus c) I‘m unlikely to bike to campus d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer

14. What do you think of biking inside campus? (Only for the usage inside the campus) a) b) c) d)

I like the idea If possible, I‘m very likely to bike inside the campus Maybe I‘m unlikely to ride it Never thought about by me to bike inside the campus / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer 126

7.3% 7.1% 9.1% 3.7% 0.2% 0.4%

137 11 42 31 24 3 248

0.3% 0.6% 1.5% 9.9% 15.3% 0.3% 27.8% 19.6% 2.8% 5.1% 0.3% 27.8% 8.4% 18.2% 1.0% 0.2% 27.8% 15.4% 1.2% 4.7% 3.5% 2.7% 0.3% 27.8%

143 67 11

16.0% 7.5% 1.2%

11 13 3

1.2% 1.5% 0.3%

15. How much is your weekly transportation costs to campus?

248

a) Rp 0 - Rp5,000 b) Rp5,000 - Rp20,000 c) Rp20,000 - Rp50,000 d) Rp50,000 - Rp100,000 e) More than Rp100,000 No answer

16. What do you think if there is no car permitted to enter in the campus, but special parking building is provided outside the campus?

6 45 80 75 39 3 248

a) Indeed, it should be no car permitted to enter in the campus b) It‘s a good idea c) It‘s unlikely to be no car entering in the campus d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer

17. What do you think if there is no motorcycle permitted to enter in the campus, but special parking building is provided outside the campus?

248

19. What is your opinion on adding more green vegetations in the campus area? a) Good, it will be beautiful b) I like the idea, more vegetations will reduce pollutants in the campus c) It looks impossible d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer 127

5.6% 9.0% 7.0% 4.5% 1.6% 0.2% 27.8%

33 68 106 26 14 1 248

a) Indeed, it should be b) It‘s a good idea c) It looks impossible d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer

0.7% 5.1% 9.0% 8.4% 4.4% 0.3% 27.8%

50 80 62 40 14 2

a) Indeed, it should be no motorcycle permitted to enter in the campus b) It‘s a good idea c) It‘s unlikely to be no motorcycle entering in the campus d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer

18. What is your opinion on making new garden or green area in the campus?

27.8%

3.7% 7.6% 11.9% 2.9% 1.6% 0.1% 27.8%

174 62 1 2 7 2 248

19.5% 7.0% 0.1% 0.2% 0.8% 0.2% 27.8%

104

11.7%

131 3 2 4 4

14.7% 0.3% 0.2% 0.4% 0.4%

Appendix 5: Result of Questionnaire Dissemination (Absolute and Relative Number)

BICYCLE Question

Respondent

%

1. What do you usually chose as your means of transportation to UIN, mostly?

18

2.0%

a) By motorcycle b) By public transportation c) By bicycle d) Walking on foot e) By my own car f) Other

0 0 18 0 0 0

2. What is the reason for your transportation choice?

18

a) Fast b) Cheap c) Usual d) It is hot for biking or by public transportation e) I proud with my own vehicle f) To avoid traffic jam No answer

3. Would you prefer the public transportation, if it is cheaper than private vehicle?

5 4 4 2 3 0 0 18

a) Yes, I will take a bus or other public transportation b) No, I prefer my motorcycle c) No, I prefer my own car d) Maybe No answer

4. Would you prefer the public transportation, if it is faster than private vehicle?

5. Do you often maintain your vehicle, especially motorcycle? a) Yes b) No No answer a1 If yes, what is maintained? a) Lights b) Brakes c) Filters d) Spark-plug e) All No answer

2.0% 4 4 2 8 0

18

a) Yes, I will take a bus other public transportation b) No, I prefer my motorcycle c) No, I prefer my own car d) Maybe No answer

0.4% 0.4% 0.2% 0.9% 2.0%

4 4 5 5 0 18

0.4% 0.4% 0.6% 0.6% 2.0%

8 10 0 18 1 8 1 1 4 3 128

2.0% 2.0% 0.6% 0.4% 0.4% 0.2% 0.3% -

0.9% 1.1% 2.0% 0.1% 0.9% 0.1% 0.1% 0.4% 0.3%

b1 If yes, why? a) For safety b) To extend the usage c) To keep it in good condition d) To prevent the decrease of the exhaust gas quality No answer c1 If yes, how much is spent for maintenance work a year? a) Rp20.000 - Rp50.000 b) Rp50.000 - Rp100.000 c) Rp100.000 - Rp200.000 d) More than Rp200.000 No answer a2 If no, why not? a) Unnecessary b) Expensive c) Never thought about / Not thinkable No answer

18 6 3 5 1 3 18 0 3 9 2 4 18 3 3 6 6

6. Where do you refuel?

18

a) Always in the official fuel station b) Mostly in the official fuel station c) Sometimes in the official fuel station, sometimes in others d) Mostly from the streetsellers No answer

7. What‘s your daily distance from your accommodation to UIN?

6 3 5 1 3 18

a) Less than 1km b) 1km-3km c) 3km-5km d) 5-10km e) More than 10km No answer

2.0% 5 3 6 3 1 0

8. How much time do you spend in traffic on your ride to UIN? (Back and forth are summed) a) 5-30 minutes b) 30minutes - 1hour c) 1-2hours d) 2-4hours e) More than 4hours No answer

18

0.6% 0.3% 0.7% 0.3% 0.1% 2.0%

5 5 4 4 0 0 129

2.0% 0.7% 0.3% 0.6% 0.1% 0.3% 2.0% 0.3% 1.0% 0.2% 0.4% 2.0% 0.3% 0.3% 0.7% 0.7% 2.0% 0.7% 0.3% 0.6% 0.1% 0.3%

0.6% 0.6% 0.4% 0.4% -

9. How much time do you spend in traffic on your ride to UIN, if there is no daily traffic jam? (Back and forth are summed)

18

a) 5-30 minutes b) 30minutes - 1hour c) 1-2hours d) 2-4hours e) More than 4hours No answer

2.0% 9 3 6 0 0 0

10. During lecturing period, how many times in a week do you go to UIN?

18

a) Once b) Twice c) 3 times d) 4 times e) 5 times or more No answer

2.0% 2 2 4 3 7 0

11. Does your family have a motorcycle?

18

a) Yes b) No c) More than one No answer

8 7 3 0

12. Does your family have a car?

18

a) Yes b) No c) More than one No answer

3 12 3 0

13. What do you think of biking to campus?

18

a) I like the idea b) I‘m very likely to bike to campus c) I‘m unlikely to bike to campus d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer

14. What do you think of biking inside campus? (Only for the usage inside the campus) a) b) c) d)

I like the idea If possible, I‘m very likely to bike inside the campus Maybe I‘m unlikely to ride it Never thought about by me to bike inside the campus / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer 130

1.0% 0.3% 0.7% -

9 6 3 0 0 0 18

0.2% 0.2% 0.4% 0.3% 0.8% 2.0% 0.9% 0.8% 0.3% 2.0% 0.3% 1.3% 0.3% 2.0% 1.0% 0.7% 0.3% 2.0%

5 8 2

0.6% 0.9% 0.2%

2 1 0

0.2% 0.1% -

15. How much is your weekly transportation costs to campus?

18

a) Rp 0 - Rp5,000 b) Rp5,000 - Rp20,000 c) Rp20,000 - Rp50,000 d) Rp50,000 - Rp100,000 e) More than Rp100,000 No answer

2.0% 3 5 1 6 2 1

16. What do you think if there is no car permitted to enter in the campus, but special parking building is provided outside the campus?

18

a) Indeed, it should be no car permitted to enter in the campus b) It‘s a good idea c) It‘s unlikely to be no car entering in the campus d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer

17. What do you think if there is no motorcycle permitted to enter in the campus, but special parking building is provided outside the campus?

18. What is your opinion on making new garden or green area in the campus?

18

a) Good, it will be beautiful b) I like the idea, more vegetations will reduce pollutants in the campus c) It looks impossible d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer 131

0.2% 1.2% 0.4% 0.1% 2.0%

2 11 4 1 0 0 18

a) Indeed, it should be b) It‘s a good idea c) It looks impossible d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer

19. What is your opinion on adding more green vegetations in the campus area?

2.0% 2 11 4 1 0 0

a) Indeed, it should be no motorcycle permitted to enter in the campus b) It‘s a good idea c) It‘s unlikely to be no motorcycle entering in the campus d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer

0.3% 0.6% 0.1% 0.7% 0.2% 0.1%

0.2% 1.2% 0.4% 0.1% 2.0%

7 6 3 2 0 0 18

0.8% 0.7% 0.3% 0.2% 2.0%

4

0.4%

6 2 5 1 0

0.7% 0.2% 0.6% 0.1% -

Appendix 6: Result of Questionnaire Dissemination (Absolute and Relative Number)

ON FOOT Question

1.

What do you usually chose as your means of transportation to UIN, mostly?

Respondent

%

224

25.1%

a) By motorcycle b) By public transportation c) By bicycle d) Walking on foot e) By my own car f) Other

0 0 0 224 0 0

2. What is the reason for your transportation choice?

224

a) Fast b) Cheap c) Usual d) It is hot for biking or by public transportation e) I proud with my own vehicle f) To avoid traffic jam No answer

3. Would you prefer the public transportation, if it is cheaper than private vehicle?

23 20 163 3 2 8 5 224

a) Yes, I will take a bus or other public transportation b) No, I prefer my motorcycle c) No, I prefer my own car d) Maybe No answer

4. Would you prefer the public transportation, if it is faster than private vehicle?

5. Do you often maintain your vehicle, especially motorcycle? a) Yes b) No No answer a1 If yes, what is maintained? a) Lights b) Brakes c) Filters d) Spark-plug e) All No answer

25.1% 89 28 9 87 11

224

a) Yes, I will take a bus other public transportation b) No, I prefer my motorcycle c) No, I prefer my own car d) Maybe No answer

10.0% 3.1% 1.0% 9.8% 1.2% 25.1%

107 28 8 68 13 224

12.0% 3.1% 0.9% 7.6% 1.5% 25.1%

47 150 27 224 4 9 2 6 40 163 132

25.1% 25.1% 2.6% 2.2% 18.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.9% 0.6%

5.3% 16.8% 3.0% 25.1% 0.4% 1.0% 0.2% 0.7% 4.5% 18.3%

b1 If yes, why? a) For safety b) To extend the usage c) To keep it in good condition d) To prevent the decrease of the exhaust gas quality No answer c1 If yes, how much is spent for maintenance work a year? a) Rp20.000 - Rp50.000 b) Rp50.000 - Rp100.000 c) Rp100.000 - Rp200.000 d) More than Rp200.000 No answer a2 If no, why not? a) Unnecessary b) Expensive c) Never thought about / Not thinkable No answer

224 17 7 38 0 162 224 5 11 17 26 165 224 38 24 41 121

6. Where do you refuel?

224

a) Always in the official fuel station b) Mostly in the official fuel station c) Sometimes in the official fuel station, sometimes in others d) Mostly from the streetsellers No answer

7. What‘s your daily distance from your accommodation to UIN?

72 41 37 8 66 224

a) Less than 1km b) 1km-3km c) 3km-5km d) 5-10km e) More than 10km No answer

25.1% 154 42 14 6 3 5

8. How much time do you spend in traffic on your ride to UIN? (Back and forth are summed) a) 5-30 minutes b) 30minutes - 1hour c) 1-2hours d) 2-4hours e) More than 4hours No answer

224

17.3% 4.7% 1.6% 0.7% 0.3% 0.6% 25.1%

188 20 3 7 2 4 133

25.1% 1.9% 0.8% 4.3% 18.2% 25.1% 0.6% 1.2% 1.9% 2.9% 18.5% 25.1% 4.3% 2.7% 4.6% 13.6% 25.1% 8.1% 4.6% 4.2% 0.9% 7.4%

21.1% 2.2% 0.3% 0.8% 0.2% 0.4%

9. How much time do you spend in traffic on your ride to UIN, if there is no daily traffic jam? (Back and forth are summed)

224

a) 5-30 minutes b) 30minutes - 1hour c) 1-2hours d) 2-4hours e) More than 4hours No answer

25.1% 176 17 11 5 2 13

10. During lecturing period, how many times in a week do you go to UIN?

224

a) Once b) Twice c) 3 times d) 4 times e) 5 times or more No answer

25.1% 1 6 9 76 132 0

11. Does your family have a motorcycle?

224

a) Yes b) No c) More than one No answer

169 24 30 1

12. Does your family have a car?

224

a) Yes b) No c) More than one No answer

93 118 11 2

13. What do you think of biking to campus?

224

a) I like the idea b) I‘m very likely to bike to campus c) I‘m unlikely to bike to campus d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer

14. What do you think of biking inside campus? (Only for the usage inside the campus) a) b) c) d)

I like the idea If possible, I‘m very likely to bike inside the campus Maybe I‘m unlikely to ride it Never thought about by me to bike inside the campus / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer 134

19.8% 1.9% 1.2% 0.6% 0.2% 1.5%

154 28 15 14 12 1 224

0.1% 0.7% 1.0% 8.5% 14.8% 25.1% 19.0% 2.7% 3.4% 0.1% 25.1% 10.4% 13.2% 1.2% 0.2% 25.1% 17.3% 3.1% 1.7% 1.6% 1.3% 0.1% 25.1%

152 38 9

17.1% 4.3% 1.0%

15 7 3

1.7% 0.8% 0.3%

15. How much is your weekly transportation costs to campus?

224

a) Rp 0 - Rp5,000 b) Rp5,000 - Rp20,000 c) Rp20,000 - Rp50,000 d) Rp50,000 - Rp100,000 e) More than Rp100,000 No answer

25.1% 114 35 42 17 12 4

16. What do you think if there is no car permitted to enter in the campus, but special parking building is provided outside the campus?

224

a) Indeed, it should be no car permitted to enter in the campus b) It‘s a good idea c) It‘s unlikely to be no car entering in the campus d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer

17. What do you think if there is no motorcycle permitted to enter in the campus, but special parking building is provided outside the campus?

18. What is your opinion on making new garden or green area in the campus?

224

a) Good, it will be beautiful b) I like the idea, more vegetations will reduce pollutants in the campus c) It looks impossible d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer 135

4.4% 10.3% 4.7% 3.8% 1.7% 0.2% 25.1%

23 88 80 21 8 4 224

a) Indeed, it should be b) It‘s a good idea c) It looks impossible d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer

19. What is your opinion on adding more green vegetations in the campus area?

25.1% 39 92 42 34 15 2

a) Indeed, it should be no motorcycle permitted to enter in the campus b) It‘s a good idea c) It‘s unlikely to be no motorcycle entering in the campus d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer

12.8% 3.9% 4.7% 1.9% 1.3% 0.4%

2.6% 9.9% 9.0% 2.4% 0.9% 0.4% 25.1%

130 72 7 6 5 4 224

14.6% 8.1% 0.8% 0.7% 0.6% 0.4% 25.1%

80

9.0%

126 5 5 6 2

14.1% 0.6% 0.6% 0.7% 0.2%

Appendix 7: Result of Questionnaire Dissemination (Absolute and Relative Number)

CAR Question

Respondent

%

1. What do you usually chose as your means of transportation to UIN, mostly?

16

1.8%

a) By motorcycle b) By public transportation c) By bicycle d) Walking on foot e) By my own car f) Other

0 0 0 0 16 0

2. What is the reason for your transportation choice?

16

a) Fast b) Cheap c) Usual d) It is hot for biking or by public transportation e) I proud with my own vehicle f) To avoid traffic jam No answer

3. Would you prefer the public transportation, if it is cheaper than private vehicle?

5 0 6 3 2 0 0 16

a) Yes, I will take a bus or other public transportation b) No, I prefer my motorcycle c) No, I prefer my own car d) Maybe No answer

4. Would you prefer the public transportation, if it is faster than private vehicle?

5. Do you often maintain your vehicle, especially motorcycle? a) Yes b) No No answer a1 If yes, what is maintained? a) Lights b) Brakes c) Filters d) Spark-plug e) All No answer

1.8% 5 1 6 4 0

16

a) Yes, I will take a bus other public transportation b) No, I prefer my motorcycle c) No, I prefer my own car d) Maybe No answer

0.6% 0.1% 0.7% 0.4% 1.8%

4 3 5 4 0 16

0.4% 0.3% 0.6% 0.4% 1.8%

9 7 0 16 0 2 1 0 7 6 136

1.8% 1.8% 0.6% 0.7% 0.3% 0.2% -

1.0% 0.8% 1.8% 0.2% 0.1% 0.8% 0.7%

b1 If yes, why? a) For safety b) To extend the usage c) To keep it in good condition d) To prevent the decrease of the exhaust gas quality No answer c1 If yes, how much is spent for maintenance work a year? a) Rp20.000 - Rp50.000 b) Rp50.000 - Rp100.000 c) Rp100.000 - Rp200.000 d) More than Rp200.000 No answer a2 If no, why not? a) Unnecessary b) Expensive c) Never thought about / Not thinkable No answer

16 1 1 8 0 6 16 0 1 2 7 6 16 3 1 3 9

6. Where do you refuel?

16

a) Always in the official fuel station b) Mostly in the official fuel station c) Sometimes in the official fuel station, sometimes in others d) Mostly from the streetsellers No answer

7. What‘s your daily distance from your accommodation to UIN?

13 1 2 0 0 16

a) Less than 1km b) 1km-3km c) 3km-5km d) 5-10km e) More than 10km No answer

1.8% 0 4 2 2 8 0

8. How much time do you spend in traffic on your ride to UIN? (Back and forth are summed) a) 5-30 minutes b) 30minutes - 1hour c) 1-2hours d) 2-4hours e) More than 4hours No answer

16

0.4% 0.2% 0.2% 0.9% 1.8%

2 4 4 4 2 0 137

1.8% 0.1% 0.1% 0.9% 0.7% 1.8% 0.1% 0.2% 0.8% 0.7% 1.8% 0.3% 0.1% 0.3% 1.0% 1.8% 1.5% 0.1% 0.2% -

0.2% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.2% -

9. How much time do you spend in traffic on your ride to UIN, if there is no daily traffic jam? (Back and forth are summed)

16

a) 5-30 minutes b) 30minutes - 1hour c) 1-2hours d) 2-4hours e) More than 4hours No answer

1.8% 1 8 3 4 0 0

10. During lecturing period, how many times in a week do you go to UIN?

16

a) Once b) Twice c) 3 times d) 4 times e) 5 times or more No answer

1.8% 1 2 0 4 9 0

11. Does your family have a motorcycle?

16

a) Yes b) No c) More than one No answer

10 4 2 0

12. Does your family have a car?

16

a) Yes b) No c) More than one No answer

11 0 5 0

13. What do you think of biking to campus?

16

a) I like the idea b) I‘m very likely to bike to campus c) I‘m unlikely to bike to campus d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer

14. What do you think of biking inside campus? (Only for the usage inside the campus) a) b) c) d)

I like the idea If possible, I‘m very likely to bike inside the campus Maybe I‘m unlikely to ride it Never thought about by me to bike inside the campus / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer 138

0.1% 0.9% 0.3% 0.4% -

7 5 0 1 3 0 16

0.1% 0.2% 0.4% 1.0% 1.8% 1.1% 0.4% 0.2% 1.8% 1.2% 0.6% 1.8% 0.8% 0.6% 0.1% 0.3% 1.8%

8 6 1

0.9% 0.7% 0.1%

0 1 0

0.1% -

15. How much is your weekly transportation costs to campus?

16

a) Rp 0 - Rp5,000 b) Rp5,000 - Rp20,000 c) Rp20,000 - Rp50,000 d) Rp50,000 - Rp100,000 e) More than Rp100,000 No answer

1.8% 0 0 3 3 9 1

16. What do you think if there is no car permitted to enter in the campus, but special parking building is provided outside the campus?

16

a) Indeed, it should be no car permitted to enter in the campus b) It‘s a good idea c) It‘s unlikely to be no car entering in the campus d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer

17. What do you think if there is no motorcycle permitted to enter in the campus, but special parking building is provided outside the campus?

18. What is your opinion on making new garden or green area in the campus?

16

139

0.1% 0.2% 1.0% 0.3% 0.1% 1.8%

1 9 3 1 2 0 16

a) Indeed, it should be b) It‘s a good idea c) It looks impossible d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer

19. What is your opinion on adding more green vegetations in the campus area? a) Good, it will be beautiful b) I like the idea, more vegetations will reduce pollutants in the campus c) It looks impossible d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer

1.8% 1 2 9 3 1 0

a) Indeed, it should be no motorcycle permitted to enter in the campus b) It‘s a good idea c) It‘s unlikely to be no motorcycle entering in the campus d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer

0.3% 0.3% 1.0% 0.1%

0.1% 1.0% 0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 1.8%

7 6 2 1 0 0

0.8% 0.7% 0.2% 0.1% -

16

1.8%

7

0.8%

6

0.7%

0 3 0 0

0.3% -

Appendix 8: Result of Questionnaire Dissemination (Absolute and Relative Number)

OTHER Question

Respondent

%

1. What do you usually chose as your means of transportation to UIN, mostly?

5

0.6%

a) By motorcycle b) By public transportation c) By bicycle d) Walking on foot e) By my own car f) Other

2. What is the reason for your transportation choice? a) Fast b) Cheap c) Usual d) It is hot for biking or by public transportation e) I proud with my own vehicle f) To avoid traffic jam No answer

0 0 0 0 0 5 5 4 0 1 0 0 0 0

3. Would you prefer the public transportation, if it is cheaper than private vehicle?

5

a) Yes, I will take a bus or other public transportation b) No, I prefer my motorcycle c) No, I prefer my own car d) Maybe No answer

2 0 0 3 0

4. Would you prefer the public transportation, if it is faster than private vehicle?

5

a) Yes, I will take a bus other public transportation b) No, I prefer my motorcycle c) No, I prefer my own car d) Maybe No answer

4 0 0 1 0

5. Do you often maintain your vehicle, especially motorcycle?

5

a) Yes b) No No answer a1 If yes, what is maintained? a) Lights b) Brakes c) Filters d) Spark-plug e) All No answer

2 3 0 5 0 0 0 0 2 3 140

0.6% 0.6% 0.4% 0.1% 0.6% 0.2% 0.3% 0.6% 0.4% 0.1% 0.6% 0.2% 0.3% 0.6% 0.2% 0.3%

b1 If yes, why? a) For safety b) To extend the usage c) To keep it in good condition d) To prevent the decrease of the exhaust gas quality No answer c1 If yes, how much is spent for maintenance work a year? a) Rp20.000 - Rp50.000 b) Rp50.000 - Rp100.000 c) Rp100.000 - Rp200.000 d) More than Rp200.000 No answer a2 If no, why not? a) Unnecessary b) Expensive c) Never thought about / Not thinkable No answer

6. Where do you refuel? a) Always in the official fuel station b) Mostly in the official fuel station c) Sometimes in the official fuel station, sometimes in others d) Mostly from the streetsellers No answer

5 1 0 1 0 3 5 0 1 0 1 3 5 1 0 1 3 5 2 1 1 1 0

7. What‘s your daily distance from your accommodation to UIN?

5

a) Less than 1km b) 1km-3km c) 3km-5km d) 5-10km e) More than 10km No answer

0 0 2 2 1 0

8. How much time do you spend in traffic on your ride to UIN? (Back and forth are summed)

5

a) 5-30 minutes b) 30minutes - 1hour c) 1-2hours d) 2-4hours e) More than 4hours No answer

0 1 2 1 1 0 141

0.6% 0.1% 0.1% 0.3% 0.6% 0.1% 0.1% 0.3% 0.6% 0.1% 0.1% 0.3% 0.6% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.6% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.6% 0.1% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% -

9. How much time do you spend in traffic on your ride to UIN, if there is no daily traffic jam? (Back and forth are summed)

5

a) 5-30 minutes b) 30minutes - 1hour c) 1-2hours d) 2-4hours e) More than 4hours No answer

1 3 0 0 1 0

10. During lecturing period, how many times in a week do you go to UIN?

5

a) Once b) Twice c) 3 times d) 4 times e) 5 times or more No answer

11. Does your family have a motorcycle? a) Yes b) No c) More than one No answer

12. Does your family have a car? a) Yes b) No c) More than one No answer

13. What do you think of biking to campus? a) I like the idea b) I‘m very likely to bike to campus c) I‘m unlikely to bike to campus d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer

14. What do you think of biking inside campus? (Only for the usage inside the campus) a) b) c) d)

I like the idea If possible, I‘m very likely to bike inside the campus Maybe I‘m unlikely to ride it Never thought about by me to bike inside the campus / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer 142

1 0 0 1 3 0 5 4 0 1 0 5 2 3 0 0 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 5

0.6% 0.1% 0.3% 0.1% 0.6% 0.1% 0.1% 0.3% 0.6% 0.4% 0.1% 0.6% 0.2% 0.3% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%

4 1 0

0.4% 0.1% -

0 0 0

-

15. How much is your weekly transportation costs to campus?

5

a) Rp 0 - Rp5,000 b) Rp5,000 - Rp20,000 c) Rp20,000 - Rp50,000 d) Rp50,000 - Rp100,000 e) More than Rp100,000 No answer

0 0 2 2 1 0

16. What do you think if there is no car permitted to enter in the campus, but special parking building is provided outside the campus?

5

a) Indeed, it should be no car permitted to enter in the campus b) It‘s a good idea c) It‘s unlikely to be no car entering in the campus d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer

1 1 2 1 0 0

17. What do you think if there is no motorcycle permitted to enter in the campus, but special parking building is provided outside the campus?

5

a) Indeed, it should be no motorcycle permitted to enter in the campus b) It‘s a good idea c) It‘s unlikely to be no motorcycle entering in the campus d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer

18. What is your opinion on making new garden or green area in the campus? a) Indeed, it should be b) It‘s a good idea c) It looks impossible d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer 19. What is your opinion on adding more green vegetations in the campus area? a) Good, it will be beautiful b) I like the idea, more vegetations will reduce pollutants in the campus c) It looks impossible d) Never thought about by me / not thinkable e) Other opinion No answer 143

0 3 1 1 0 0 5 1 3 1 0 0 0 5 3 1 0 0 1 0

0.6% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.6% 0.1% 0.1% 0.2% 0.1% 0.6%

0.3% 0.1% 0.1% 0.6% 0.1% 0.3% 0.1% 0.6% 0.3% 0.1% 0.1% -

Appendix 9: Grand Mapping Dominant Reasons

Average Distance

1) Fast 2) Usual

6.6 km

1) Usual 2) Fast 3) Hot

6.94 km

1) Fast 2) Cheap & Usual

3.75 km

1) Usual 2) Fast 3) Cheap

1.72 km

1) Usual 2) Cheap 3) Fat

3.21 km

1) Fast 2) Avoid traffic jam

7.23 km 144

5 km scale = motorcycle (7.23 km)

= car (6.94 km)

= other (6.6 km) UIN

= bicycle (3.75 km)

= public transportation (3.21 km)

= on foot (1.72 km)

= 5 kilometer 145

5 km scale Motorcycle users‘ demography Distance

UIN

380 respondents

100.0%

a) 10km

175

46.1%

not identified xi

3

0.8% fixi

1 km

30

30

2 km

40

80

fi

4 km

36

144

7.5 km

96

720

10 km

175 377

1750

Total Average distance to campus

2724 : 377

2724 7.23 km

= 5 kilometer 146

5 km scale Public transportation users‘ demography Distance

UIN

248 respondents

100.0%

a) 10km

2

0.8%

not identified xi

4

1.6% fixi

1 km

65

65

2 km

63

126

4 km

fi

81

324

7.5 km

33

247.5

10 km

2 244

20

Total Average distance to campus

782.5 : 244

782.5 3.21 km

= 5 kilometer 147

5 km scale Bicycle users‘ demography Distance

UIN

18 respondents

100.0%

a) 10km xi

1 fi

5.6% fixi

1 km

5

5

2 km

3

6

4 km

6

24

7.5 km

3

22.5

10 km

1 18

10 67.5

67.5 : 18

3.75 km

Total Average distance to campus

= 5 kilometer 148

5 km scale Walker on foot demography Distance a) 10km

3

1.3%

not identified

5

2.2%

xi

fi

fixi

1 km

154

154

2 km

42

84

4 km

14

64

6

45

7.5 km 10 km Total Average distance to campus

= 5 kilometer

100.0%

3

30

219

377

377 : 219

1.72 km

149

5 km scale Car users‘ demography Distance

UIN

16 respondents

100.0%

a) 10km xi

fi

1 km

0

0

2 km

4

8

4 km

2

8

7.5 km

2

15

10 km

8

80

Total Average distance to campus

16

111

111 : 16

6.94 km

= 5 kilometer 150

5 km scale Other-users‘ demography Distance

UIN

5 respondents

100.0%

a) 10km xi

1 fi

20.0% fixi

1 km

0

0

2 km

0

0

4 km

2

8

7.5 km

2

15

10 km

1 5

10

33 : 5

6.6 km

Total Average distance to campus

33

= 5 kilometer 151

Appendix 10: Observation Photos OBSERVATION 21st September 2012

OBSERVATION 21st September 2012

OBSERVATION

OBSERVATION

21st September 2012

21st September 2012

152

OBSERVATION

OBSERVATION

21st September 2012

21st September 2012

OBSERVATION 25th September 2012 OBSERVATION 21st September 2012

153

OBSERVATION

OBSERVATION

25th September 2012

25th September 2012

OBSERVATION 25th September 2012

OBSERVATION 25th September 2012 154

OBSERVATION th

5 March 2013

OBSERVATION 5th March 2013

OBSERVATION OBSERVATION

5th March 2013

5th March 2013

155

Irhamni Abdul Latif‘s photo, 15th April 2013 156

Appendix 11: Chi Square Table Significance Level df  = 0.05  = 0.01  = 0.001 1 3.84 6.64 10.83 2 5.99 9.21 13.82 3 7.82 11.35 16.27 4 9.49 13.28 18.47 5 11.07 15.09 20.52 6 12.59 16.81 22.46 7 14.07 18.48 24.32 8 15.51 20.09 26.13 9 16.92 21.67 27.88 10 18.31 23.21 29.59 11 19.68 24.73 31.26 12 21.03 26.22 32.91 13 22.36 27.69 34.53 14 23.69 29.14 36.12 15 25.00 30.58 37.70 16 26.30 32.00 39.25 17 27.59 33.41 40.79 18 28.87 34.81 42.31 19 30.14 36.19 43.82 20 31.41 37.57 45.32 21 32.67 38.93 46.80 22 33.92 40.29 48.27 23 35.17 41.64 49.73 24 36.42 42.98 51.18 25 37.65 44.31 52.62 26 38.89 45.64 54.05 27 40.11 46.96 55.48 28 41.34 48.28 56.89 29 42.56 49.59 58.30 30 43.77 50.89 59.70 31 44.99 52.19 61.10 32 46.19 53.49 62.49 33 47.40 54.78 63.87 34 48.60 56.06 65.25 35 49.80 57.34 66.62 36 51.00 58.62 67.99 37 52.19 59.89 69.35 38 53.38 61.16 70.71

df 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88

Significance Level  = 0.05  = 0.01  = 0.001 68.67 77.39 87.97 69.83 78.62 89.27 70.99 79.84 90.57 72.15 81.07 91.88 73.31 82.29 93.17 74.47 83.52 94.47 75.62 84.73 95.75 76.78 85.95 97.03 77.93 87.17 98.34 79.08 88.38 99.62 80.23 89.59 100.88 81.38 90.80 102.15 82.53 92.01 103.46 83.68 93.22 104.72 84.82 94.42 105.97 85.97 95.63 107.26 87.11 96.83 108.54 88.25 98.03 109.79 89.39 99.23 111.06 90.53 100.42 112.31 91.67 101.62 113.56 92.81 102.82 114.84 93.95 104.01 116.08 95.08 105.20 117.35 96.22 106.39 118.60 97.35 107.58 119.85 98.49 108.77 121.11 99.62 109.96 122.36 100.75 111.15 123.60 101.88 112.33 124.84 103.01 113.51 126.09 104.14 114.70 127.33 105.27 115.88 128.57 106.40 117.06 129.80 107.52 118.24 131.04 108.65 119.41 132.28 109.77 120.59 133.51 110.90 121.77 134.74

157

Significance Level Significance Level df  = 0.05  = 0.01  = 0.001  = 0.05  = 0.01  = 0.001 39 54.57 62.43 72.06 89 112.02 122.94 135.96 40 55.76 63.69 73.41 90 113.15 124.12 137.19 41 56.94 64.95 74.75 91 114.27 125.29 138.45 42 58.12 66.21 76.09 92 115.39 126.46 139.66 43 59.30 67.46 77.42 93 116.51 127.63 140.90 44 60.48 68.71 78.75 94 117.63 128.80 142.12 45 61.66 69.96 80.08 95 118.75 129.97 143.32 46 62.83 71.20 81.40 96 119.87 131.14 144.55 47 64.00 72.44 82.72 97 120.99 132.31 145.78 48 65.17 73.68 84.03 98 122.11 133.47 146.99 49 66.34 74.92 85.35 99 123.23 134.64 148.21 50 67.51 76.15 86.66 100 124.34 135.81 149.48 Source:http://rumushitung.com/2013/02/02/tabel-chi-square-dan-caramenggunakannya/, accessed on May 16, 2013.

df

158