Lesson video

Hello and welcome.

My name is Miss Harrison and I'm so excited to be learning with you today.

Today's lesson is called Strategies for Achieving Sustainability: "Bottom-Up" Strategies.

Grab everything you might need for today's lesson and let's begin our learning.

By the end of today's lesson, you will be able to explain advantages and disadvantages of bottom-up strategies for achieving sustainability in Jakarta.

Before we can begin this learning, we need to define the keywords that we'll be using throughout today's lesson.

The keywords in today's lesson are: bottom-up development, sustainable, and cooperative.

Bottom-up development is a small-scale project led by local people to meet community needs, often supported by NGOs.

Sustainable: this is development that meets the needs of people today without damaging the environment or reducing resources for future generations.

And cooperative: this is a group of people working together to achieve shared goals.

A housing cooperative is where residents help and plan and manage their homes, often in partnership with the local government or NGOs.

Now that we've defined these keywords, we can begin our learning.

The first question we are going to explore in today's lesson is how do bottom-up projects solve housing problems? Today we're looking at bottom-up development, a type of development that starts at the community level.

Unlike top-down approaches where decisions are made by governments or big organisations, bottom-up development is led by local people.

The players involved often include non-governmental organisations, NGOs, community groups, and the workers themselves.

These groups identify the most urgent local problems and work together to find solutions.

The processes used can include: aid from charities or international partners; microfinance, which is a small loan that helps individuals start businesses; and unionisation, where workers organise to improve pay or working conditions.

The aim of bottom-up development is to meet local needs and improve people's quality of life using solutions that are sustainable, affordable, and appropriate to the local context.

This kind of development empowers communities to take charge of their own future, often with long lasting results.

Why might a government choose bottom-up over top down development? Pause the video here whilst you decide and press play when you're ready to continue.

Excellent.

Let's hear some answers.

One student said, "Bottom-up development is community driven, often more sustainable and responsive to local needs, but it may be slower, less well funded, and harder to scale, and they're correct.

Well done if you manage to come up with ideas like this as well.

True or false? Top-down development is always designed and led by local communities.

Pause the video here whilst you decide and press play when you're ready to continue.

Excellent.

This statement is false.

I would now like you to explain why.

Pause the video here and press play when you're ready to continue.

Fantastic.

The reason why this statement is false is because top-down development is led by governments or large corporations, not local communities.

It often aims to improve infrastructure at a citywide or national level.

Well done if you explained that correctly.

To understand why bottom-up development is needed, we need to look at these challenges some communities face.

In Jakarta, kampungs are informal settlements where people build their own homes, often without official planning or government support.

These areas exist because there isn't enough affordable housing for the city's growing population.

Over 3.

5 million people live in kampungs.

They're usually built on flood plains or wasteland where land is available but risky.

Because their housing is self-built, it often lacks proper infrastructure, things like clean water, sanitation, electricity, and drainage.

The people living here are doing what they can with what they have.

These settlements show that both the urgency of urban poverty and the resourcefulness of communities.

That's why bottom-up development is so important in places like this, it allows local people to improve their living conditions in ways that are sustainable, low cost, and tailored to their needs.

I would like you to identify the missing labels of the characteristics of kampungs.

Pause the video here whilst you decide and press play when you're ready to continue.

Fantastic.

The missing labels are "built on floodplains or wasteland" and "lack of infrastructure." Well done on this.

Let's look at a real life example of a bottom-up development in action.

Kampong Akuarium, a community in Jakarta.

In 2016, the kampung was demolished.

The residents were displaced, but instead of giving up, the community returned and rebuilt their homes.

By 2017, with the help of NGOs and community groups, they secured an agreement with the government, a huge step in taking back control of their future.

In 2019, the residents formed a housing cooperative.

That means they worked together to design and manage their own homes.

A true example of community-led planning.

By 2021, the first two housing blocks were completed and 900 residents were rehoused.

Now those residents live in permanent homes with clean water, sanitation and legal land ownership, many for the first time in their lives.

Kampung Akuarium shows just how important bottom-up development can be and how powerful and effective it is.

It gives people a voice, creates long-term change and builds homes in communities that truly meet local needs.

Now we can see just how much Kampung Akuarium has changed over time, thanks to bottom-up development, and we can track that change using satellite imagery from ArcGIS's Wayback feature.

Let's start with 2014.

Here we can see a dense informal settlement, the original kampung.

Housing was tightly packed and lacked proper planning or services.

By 2017, after the kampung was demolished in 2016, the area appears mostly cleared, and this is when the community began organising, working with NGOs and securing government support to rebuild.

Fast forward to 2025 and the transformation is clear.

We can now see planned housing blocks, green spaces and new infrastructure.

This is the result of the cooperative effort we talked about earlier, a bottom-up project that created permanent homes with clean water, sanitation and legal ownership.

This timeline shows how urban areas can be physically transformed when communities are empowered to lead change, and how technology like ArcGIS can help us track and understand urban development.

What was achieved by Kampung Aquarium's project? Was it A: the community was relocated to rural areas, B: residents got secure homes with government support or C: the site was turned into a mall, or D: all housing was temporary? Pause the video here whilst you decide and press play when you're ready to continue.

Excellent.

The answer is B: residents got secure homes with government support.

Well done on this task.

How many people were rehoused in Kampung Akuarium by 2021? Was it A: 150, B: 600, C: 900, D: 3000? Pause the video here whilst you decide and press play when you're ready to continue.

Excellent.

The answer is C: 900.

Well done on this task.

Here's another example of urban development in Jakarta, but this time it's a mix of bottom-up and top-down approaches.

Kampung Pulo is built on a floodplain which makes it vulnerable to serious flood damage, especially during heavy rains over time.

Many homes were repeatedly damaged.

In response, the government worked with local community to develop a solution.

Instead of forcing everyone to move, they used a mixed approach.

Some residents, especially those at highest risk, were relocated to safer housing, but around 160 families chose to stay.

For them, conditions were improved through bottom-up approach.

They received better toilets, lighting, and drainage.

The government invested in new flood defences along the Ciliwung River to protect the area from future floods, a clear example of top-down planning.

By 2025, the satellite images show significant changes with improved infrastructure and flood protection in place.

This case shows how blending top-down and bottom-up approaches can lead to more practical, respectful solutions that balance safety, local knowledge and community needs; and it raises a key question: Why might some people choose to stay even in risky areas? Maybe it's community ties, location, jobs, or simply wanting control over their own homes and futures.

Let's hear some students' answers.

Aisha said, "Some residents stay because they've lived there for generations and it's where their family jobs and support networks are." And Alex said, "People might stay because they don't trust the government's promises, or they fear being moved far away from work and schools." And they're correct.

All of these are valid concerns as to why people choose to stay rather than relocate.

Each resident brings a personal story of how bottom-up development has helped improve their quality of life.

Mariam is 68 and she lived in Kampong Akuarium since the 1980s.

In 2016, her home was demolished during the government clearance.

Thanks to the bottom-up housing project, she now lives in one of the new flats built in 2021.

She says, "This is the first time I've ever felt safe and secure in my own home," and that's really powerful.

Rafi, 26, is a construction worker and a member of the local housing cooperative.

He helped build the new housing blocks as part of the community-led design, and he says, "I'm earning money and improving our community.

Over 900 people were rehoused in this project." And we can see how powerful bottom-up development can be and how impactful it can be on these people's lives.

Lucas and Sofia are having a discussion about whether Rafi and Mariam's stories show the strengths of bottom-up projects.

Who is correct? Pause the video here whilst you read through their statements and press play when you're ready to continue.

Excellent.

The correct answer is Lucas.

I would like you to explain why.

Pause the video here and press play when you're ready to continue.

Fantastic.

The reason why Lucas was correct was because the project was community led, not government led.

Rafi was part of the cooperative and Mariam's housing was the result of planning and partnership.

Well done if you explained that correctly.

I would now like you to fill in the blanks using the words below on how do bottom-up projects solve housing problems? Pause the video here whilst you attempt this task and press play when you're ready to continue.

Excellent.

Let's check our answers.

Your text should read like this: Kampung Akuarium is a bottom-up project.

After being demolished in 2016, residents returned.

By 2021, over 900 people were rehoused with land rights and better sanitation.

Kampong Pulo mixes bottom-up and top-down.

It's built on a floodplain and some families moved, others stayed and got lights, toilets, and drainage.

New flood defences were built along the Ciliwung River.

Well done if you included those points in your answer.

You've done brilliantly.

We're now going to explore our second question of today's lesson: How are communities tackling health and education? In many parts of Jakarta, especially in kampungs, government services don't reach everyone equally, and this leads to major challenges in areas like health, sanitation, and education.

For example, only 10% of homes in kampungs have access to piped sewage, which means poor sanitation, greater health risks, and environmental damage.

Many kampungs also lack clinics and even clean toilets for schools.

But this is where bottom-up development really makes a difference.

Community groups and NGOs have stepped in to fill the gap.

They've set up over 600 Posyandu clinics, local health posts that provide maternal care, vaccination, and nutrition support.

They've also improved over 300 schools, providing better facilities, cleaner toilets and learning resources.

This is an example of how grassroots projects can respond faster and more directly to local needs, especially when government systems are overwhelmed or uneven.

It also shows that development isn't just about national projects.

It's about making sure everyone benefits, even in the most overlooked parts of the city.

Why might a government struggle to support all areas? Pause the video here whilst you have a think and press play when you're ready to continue.

Excellent.

The reason why the government may struggle to access all areas is to do with things like access, so whether it's in a remote area, they might not have as much access there, but also they might not have a greater need.

The greater need might be somewhere where there's more people that are easier to access, so this can create huge problems for areas that aren't able to get support.

True or false? Most kampungs in Jakarta have access to piped sewage and government-run clinics.

Pause the video here whilst you decide and press play when you're ready to continue.

Fantastic.

This statement was false.

I would like you to explain why.

Pause here and press play to continue.

Brilliant.

The reason why the statement was false was because only 10% of homes in kampungs have piped sewage.

Many kampungs lack clinics and clean school toilets, which is why NGOs have stepped in, supporting 600-plus Posyandu clinics and improving 300 schools.

Well done if you explained that correctly.

In Jakarta's kampungs, many people don't have access to government healthcare, so Posyandu clinics were created to fill the gaps.

These clinics are run by trained local people and there are now over 6,000 across the city.

They offer essential services like weighing babies, giving health advice, and referring patients when needed.

In 2022, they supported more than 300,000 women and children.

What makes Posyandus so effective is that they provide trusted, easy to understand advice in the local language.

As a result, immunisation rates have increased by 20% in areas with these clinics.

This is a powerful example of bottom-up development where community-led action improves health and reaches people that large systems often miss.

Why are local-led health projects more trusted than official services? Pause the video here whilst you have a think and press play when you're ready to continue.

Brilliant.

Local-led health projects are more trusted because they're run by people from the community who understand the local language, culture and needs.

This makes the advice more personal, relatable, and reliable.

What makes Posyandu clinics an effective bottom-up health strategy? Is it A: they're managed by doctors from Jakarta's hospitals who charge a fee for their services, B: they're community-run, offer trusted advice and have raised immunisation rates by 20%, C: they only support wealthy neighbourhoods, or D, they focus mainly on emergency surgeries? Pause the video here whilst you decide and press play when you're ready to continue.

Excellent.

The answer is B: they're community-run, offer trusted advice and have raised immunisation rates by 20%.

Well done on this task.

Good hygiene is essential for children to stay healthy and keep attending school, but in Jakarta, only 68% of public schools have toilets with water and soap.

Shockingly, 48% had soap and water, but no toilets at all.

To tackle this, UNICEF Jakarta launched the WASH programme in 2021, installing hygiene facilities in over 300 schools, and it made a real difference.

In those schools, student absences from illnesses dropped by 30%.

This shows how investing in basic infrastructure can improve both health and education outcomes, especially in growing cities.

Why is the WASH programme a sustainable solution? Pause here whilst you have a think and press play when you're ready to continue.

Excellent.

The WASH programme is sustainable because it improves long-term health and school attendance by providing long-lasting facilities like toilets and clean water, which reduce illnesses and supports education for future generations.

How much did school absence drop by in upgraded WASH schools? Was it A: 5%, B: 10%, C: 30%, D, 60%? Pause the video here whilst you decide and press play when you're ready to continue.

Fantastic.

The answer is C: 30%.

Well done Before this project, only half of students in Jakarta who menstruate knew how to manage it, and many missed school regularly because of it.

From 2021 to 2023, a Menstrual Hygiene project reached over 3000 boys and girls, aiming to improve knowledge and reduce stigma.

The programme used comics, hygiene kits and interactive training to make learning accessible and relatable, helping students feel more confident and supportive.

The impact was clear.

In schools where the project ran, attendance among targeted students rose by 20%.

This shows how addressing menstrual health can make a real difference in both education and equality.

One student said, "I used to be really embarrassed and stayed at home, but now I have what I need and don't miss school anymore." One teacher said, "The programme builds confidence so we can see how impactful things like this are." Each resident brings a personal story of how bottom-up development has helped improve their quality of life.

Ayu is 34.

She's a mother of three who lives in East Jakarta.

She regularly visits local Posyandu clinics where trained volunteers help her baby and give advice on nutrition.

"The nurse helped with checkups and food tips.

I trust her, she's from our area." Nina is 12 and is a student at a public school in Jakarta.

They received the hygiene upgrades through the WASH programme and the Menstrual Health workshops.

Before the improvements, she often missed school due to illness and felt embarrassed during her period.

"Now we have clean toilets, soap, and lessons about periods.

I haven't been sick in months and I don't feel scared to come to school anymore." So we can see how important these programmes are.

What do Ayu and Nina's story suggest about social impact of bottom-up development? Who is correct? Pause the video here whilst you decide and press play when you're ready to continue.

Fantastic.

The answer on the left is correct.

I would now like you to explain why.

Pause the video here and press play when you're ready to continue.

Brilliant.

The reason why the statement on the left is correct is because Ayu visits her local Posyandu where trained volunteers support mothers with checkups.

Nina's school joined the WASH and Menstrual Health programmes, which reduced absence by 30% with better hygiene and period education.

Well done if you managed to explain that correctly.

You've done brilliantly.

I would now like you to match each outcome with the correct community-led strategy.

Pause this video here and press play when you're ready to continue.

Fantastic.

Let's check our answers.

For students who menstruate felt more confident attending school during their periods, it was Menstrual Hygiene Project.

For school absence dropped by 30% after toilets and sinks were installed, was the WASH project.

Local mums weigh their babies and get health advice in kampungs was the Posyandu clinics.

Students have access to functioning toilets and hand washing facilities at school was the WASH project.

Well done on this.

I hope you managed to get them all correct.

Alex has written an answer to "Why are community-led health and education strategies sometimes more effective than top-down ones?" I would like you to read through his statement and then correct his mistakes.

Pause the video here and press play when you're ready to continue.

Excellent.

Let's check our answers.

Alex said, "They don't need any help from the government." You might have written, "They often work best when supported by NGOs or local authorities." "They don't cost anything." You might have said, "They're low cost but needs some funding and training to run well." Alex said, "Posyandu gives operations and is managed by doctors." You might have said, "There are 600 clinics in Jakarta and are run by local volunteers who offer advice, checkups and referrals." Alex said, "Only helped boys, wasn't part of Menstrual Health Programmes." You might have said, "WASH supports all students and has reduced absence by 30% and Menstrual Health helps students who menstruate stay in school confidently." Well done if you managed to identify those errors and you corrected them.

You've done brilliant in this task.

We're now going to explore our final question of today's lesson.

What makes a bottom-up strategy successful? Community-led strategies are often most effective in urban areas like Jakarta because they're built around real local needs, so why do they work? Residents are directly involved, so services are designed to match their needs.

They're cheaper because they use local materials and labour and they use appropriate technology that suits the environment.

These projects are trusted.

For example, the Posyandu clinics serve 150 families a month.

They're low-cost, 900 people were rehoused affordably in Kampung Akuarium.

And relevant.

The WASH programme cut school absences by 30%.

Together, these examples show that when communities lead, development becomes more effective, sustainable and fair.

True or false? Community-led strategies are expensive because they rely on outside contractors and imported materials.

Pause the video here whilst you decide and press play when you're ready to continue.

Fantastic.

The answer is false.

I would now like you to explain why.

Pause the video here and press play when you're ready to continue.

Well done.

The reason why it's false is because community-led strategies are often cheaper because they rely on local resources and labour.

For example, in Kampung Aquarium, the community formed a housing cooperative and worked directly with developers, helping rehouse 900 people affordably by shaping and managing the design themselves.

Well done if you explained that correctly, you've done brilliantly.

While bottom-up strategies can be powerful, they don't always succeed and here's why they might struggle.

First is land rights.

Only 10% of kampungs have legal land rights, which makes it hard for residents to plan or invest in long-term improvements.

Second is awareness.

Some people don't know that nearby health services like Posyandu clinics even exist so they miss out.

Third is funding.

Many bottom-up projects rely on volunteers and donations, which means they don't always grow or last.

And finally training.

Posyandu staff often only receive basic training, limiting the care and advice they can offer.

In places like Kampung Akuarium, progress only became possible when land rights, funding and training were improved, showing that bottom-up strategies need the right support to succeed long term.

True or false? Most kampungs in Jakarta have legal land rights, which helps bottom-up projects succeed.

Pause the video here whilst you decide if this is true or false and press play when you're ready to continue.

Excellent.

This statement is false.

I would like you to explain why.

Pause the video here and press play when you're ready to continue.

Fantastic.

The reason why this statement is false is because only 10% of kampungs have legal land rights.

The lack of land ownership makes it difficult to plan or invest in long-term solutions.

For example, in Kampung Akuarium, progress only happened after land rights funding and support improved.

Without these, many bottom-up strategies struggle to succeed.

Well done if you explained that correctly.

Bottom-up strategies are most effective when local communities lead the way, but they're even stronger when they're backed by support from NGOs or governments to make them sustainable.

First, it starts with government leadership.

Local people know their area best.

They're trusted and they understand what's really needed, but to succeed long term, they need support.

Support from organisations like NGOs or government can provide land rights, funding, training, and planning advice.

When both sides work together, they get sustainable projects, solutions that last, grow and make real impact, and that's the key.

Community input that's well funded, sustainable, and designed for large scale change.

What helps bottom-up strategies become sustainable? Is it A: local people working on their own with no support, B: support from NGOs and government through funding, training and planning, or C: projects led by external experts, D.

removing community input to speed up development? Pause the video here whilst you decide and press play when you're ready to continue.

Excellent.

The answer is B: support from NGOs and government through funding, training, or planning.

I would now like you to read each statement and decide whether you agree or disagree.

Pause the video here was to attempt this task and press play when you're ready to continue.

Fantastic, before we check our answers, I would like you to complete one more task.

I would like you to choose one bottom-up strategy you have studied and explain what makes the strategy sustainable.

In your answer, I would like you to explain what could put the strategy at risk in the future.

I would like you to use examples from the lesson and your own research to help you, such as cooperation from the government, involvement of local people, challenges like lack of funding and improvements to services like water, sanitation and healthcare.

Pause the video here whilst you attempt this task and press play when you're ready to continue.

Brilliant.

Let's check our answers.

For the first task, I asked you to agree or disagree with the statements.

Bottom-up strategies are successful when they meet local needs.

Agree.

Without any government or NGO support, most bottom-up strategies would not last long.

Agree.

Rehousing residents is sustainable when the community is not involved.

Disagree.

Projects like Posyandu are trusted so they're likely to last.

Agree.

Local knowledge is less important than expert advice.

Disagree.

Well done on this task.

I hope you managed to get those correct.

I then asked you to choose one bottom-up strategy you studied and explain what makes the strategy sustainable.

Your answer might include the following: Kampung Akuarium is a good example of sustainable bottom-up strategy because it was developed through cooperation between the community, the government, and NGOs.

After the original kampung was demolished in 2016, many residents returned and began living in temporary shelters.

Instead of removing them again, the government signed an agreement with the community to co-design a new housing plan.

In 2019, residents formed a housing cooperative that helped design buildings and now manage them.

This gave residents a sense of ownership and responsibility, increasing the likelihood that the project will succeed long-term.

Around 900 people were rehoused in better quality homes with improved infrastructure, water supply and sanitation.

They also now have secure tenure, meaning that they cannot be easily removed.

However, the strategy may face sustainability challenges in the future.

If the government withdraws funding or support, the cooperative may struggle to maintain the buildings.

There is also the risk that if other kampungs do not get the same level of involvement or support, this success will not be repeated elsewhere.

Well done on this task, you've done brilliantly and I hope you managed to include some of those points in your answer.

We've now comes the end of our learning on Strategies for Achieving Sustainability: Bottom-Up Strategies, and you've done brilliantly.

Before we end this lesson, let's summarise everything we've learned today.

Jakarta's bottom-up strategies are led by communities and NGOs to improve housing, health and education.

In kampungs like Akuarium and Pulo, residents help plan housing upgrades.

Healthcare workers, Posyandu, and school programmes like WASH and Menstrual Health Programmes improve care and attendance.

These projects are often more trusted but need better funding and support.

When communities and governments work together, the results are more sustainable.

Well done on today's lesson, you've done brilliantly and I can't wait to learn with you again very soon.