Lesson video

Hello and welcome.

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

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

By the end of today's lesson, you'll be able to describe how rapid population growth in Jakarta has created significant inequalities and challenges in managing the city.

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

The keywords are quality of life, population density, and kampungs.

Quality of life.

This is a measure of people's wellbeing, including access to housing, healthcare, education, income, and services.

Population density.

This is the number of people living per square kilometre.

Kampungs.

These are informal settlements in Indonesian cities built by residents, often on derelict or unsafe land.

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

The first question we're going to explore in today's lesson is, how is population and wealth distributed? Today, we're looking at residential disparity, which simply means an uneven distribution of housing and services across the city.

It's a major feature of many rapidly growing urban areas like Jakarta.

In cities with residential disparity, where you live can have a huge impact on your quality of life.

Wealthier people often live in apartment blocks or gated suburbs.

These areas usually have reliable electricity, clean water, and private security, and good access to schools and hospitals.

In contrast, poorer communities often live in informal housing, like self-built shelters in kampungs.

These homes are usually built wherever there's space, often on floodplains, near railways, or in areas without proper planning.

Because of this, access to services like healthcare, education, clean water, and transport is often limited, which reinforces inequality.

So residential disparity is about more than just housing.

It's about who gets what in the city and how it affects their chances in life.

Why might low-income homes be near polluted rivers? Pause the video here whilst you have a think and press play when you're ready to continue.

Excellent.

One student said that this is where land is cheapest and the only affordable option, and that's correct.

A lots of low-income people do not have enough money to buy land, so they have to build their homes on derelict spaces, which is cheap and free for them, where they can use makeshift materials for their homes.

This map shows population density across Jakarta.

In other words, how many people live in each area.

We can see that density is highest near the coast and in older city areas.

In West Jakarta, there are some very dense kampungs, especially near canals.

These areas have limited space, but high demand for housing.

In South Jakarta, on the other hand, this is the lowest population density.

Wealthy neighbourhoods like Pondok Indah have larger homes, more green space, and fewer people per square kilometre.

In North Jakarta, population density is high again, especially around Tanjung Priok port, where many people live close to industrial jobs and transport links.

But then we have an interesting case, Central Jakarta, which is less densely populated despite being in the heart of the city.

I wonder, can you pause the video here whilst you have a think, why is Central Jakarta less densely populated? Press play to continue.

Fantastic.

Central Jakarta is less densely populated because much of the land is used for government buildings, offices, and commercial spaces, not housing.

There's also limited space for new homes and the housing that does exist is often more expensive, which reduces how many people can actually afford to live here.

So even though it's in the centre of the city, fewer people actually live there compared to outer areas.

Which factor best explains why Central Jakarta has lower population densities despite being central? Is it A, it is mostly farmland and used for livestock? B, it is wealthy business zone with fewer larger homes? C, the area is often flooded and so people don't live there? Or D, it contains the city's biggest university? Pause the video here whilst you have a think and press play to continue.

Excellent.

The answer is B.

It has wealthy business zones with fewer larger homes.

Well done.

This map shows how residential disparity is laid out across Jakarta.

You can see that the city's wealth and poverty are not spread evenly and often exist right next to each other.

In Western North Jakarta, there are clear clusters of low-income areas.

These are often home to informal settlements with limited services.

Over 40% of Jakarta's population live in areas classified as low income, which shows just how widespread inequality is.

Meanwhile, the central axis of the city is mostly high-income areas.

These areas have better infrastructure, services, and planned housing.

One example is Menteng, where homes cost over 600,000 pounds.

It's one of the most expensive places to live in Jakarta, a sharp contrast to the kampungs nearby.

This shows that in rapidly growing cities like Jakarta, wealthy and poor communities often live side by side, but that access to services and quality of life can be vastly different.

True or false? Poorer people always live far away from the city centre and richer people live near the centre.

Pause the video here and press play to continue.

Fantastic.

This statement is false.

I would like you to explain why.

Pause the video here and press play to continue.

Excellent.

The reason why this statement is false is because Jakarta is more complex.

In Jakarta, many wealthy areas stretch from north to south along the central axes, but some-low income areas are found right next to rich districts, even in the inner city.

Kampungs can develop wherever there's space.

Well done if you explained that correctly.

You've done brilliantly.

Which of the following best describes the pattern of residential inequality in Jakarta? A, wealthy areas are only found in the outskirts of the city? B, low-income areas are found in the city centre only? C, rich and poor areas often exist near each other? And D, most of Jakarta is made up of high-income areas.

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

Fantastic.

The answer is C.

Rich and poor areas often exist near each other.

Well done.

In Jakarta, it's common to see luxury apartments right next to informal housing, but why is that? One reason is mixed land use.

Different types of buildings are allowed in the same area, so you can get luxury flats right beside kampungs.

Then there's limited space.

Jakarta is densely populated, so poor communities are often forced to build on leftover marginal land, even in expensive parts of the city.

Another factor is gentrification.

As wealthier people move into central areas, land prices rise, making it harder for poor residents to stay, but many do because they rely on nearby jobs and services.

Finally, social factors also play a role.

People tend to cluster by ethnicity, religion, or income, which can keep mixed income areas more tightly packed, even in a growing city.

So while rich and poor may live close together, their experiences of the city can be very different.

Why might gentrification make it harder for poor residents to stay in the city centre? Pause the video here whilst you have a think and press play when you're ready to continue.

Fantastic.

Let's hear some answers.

One student said it can increase the cost of living in areas, including higher rents.

In Jakarta, when kampungs are redeveloped into housing, poor residents may be forced to leave because they cannot afford to live there, and that's correct.

Another student says, "As kampungs in Jakarta are replaced by high-rise buildings or luxury flats, governments may evict low-income families.

These residents lose their homes and communities, and they may struggle to find affordable housing nearby, pushing them to the outskirts of the city." I hope you managed to come up with some similar ideas as well.

I would now like you to match each numbered cause to the correct effect.

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

Fantastic.

For number one, which was mixed land used, it's luxury flats next to informal houses.

For limited space, it forces people to build on marginal land.

For gentrification, it raises land prices near CBD.

And for social factors, it's people clustered by ethnicity, religion, or income.

Well done if you identified those correctly.

Which is one consequence of Jakarta's limited space for housing? Is it A, some residents build informal homes on unsafe land? B, wealthy residents build informal homes on safe land? Or C, luxury apartments are built along canals? Or D, government flats are replaced by kampungs? Pause the video here whilst you decide and press play when you're ready to continue.

Fantastic.

The answer is A, some residents build informal homes on unsafe land.

Well done if you identified that correctly.

I would now like you to describe the pattern of residential income levels shown in the map of Jakarta.

In your answer, I would like you to identify any trends, identify any anomalies, and use evidence from the map to support your description.

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

Fantastic.

Let's check our answers.

Your answer might include the following.

High-income areas, purple, are mostly found in central north-south axis through Jakarta, including places like Menteng.

In contrast, low-income areas, green, cluster in the north and west, such as West Jakarta.

The map also shows some mixed income areas, which are teal, scattered throughout the city, especially in the south.

Over 40% of Jakarta's population live in low-income areas, often near canals or on the city's edge.

Well done if you managed to include some of those points in your answer.

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

Why does quality of life vary between areas? Quality of life is how well a person's needs are met, including access to housing, healthcare, education, safety, and opportunities for work and leisure.

What factors affect someone's quality of life? Pause the video here whilst you have a think and press play when you're ready to continue.

Fantastic.

Some factors that affect someone's quality of life are sanitation, healthcare, job type, education, and housing.

Sam said, "Only 65% of residents have access to clean water and 40% live in kampungs," so we can already assume that their quality of life might be significantly poorer in these areas.

Izzy has asked, "Is happiness the same as quality of life?" No, happiness is not the same as quality of life, but they are linked.

Quality of life is about whether a person's basic needs are met, like having a safe home, access to healthcare, clean water, education, and job.

Happiness is more personal and emotional.

Someone might feel happy even if their living conditions are poor or unhappy if they're living in comfort.

So while a good quality of life can help people feel happier, they're not exactly the same.

True or false? Quality of life is only measured by how much money someone earns.

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

Fantastic.

This statement is false.

I would now like you to explain why.

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

Brilliant, the reason why this statement is false is because while income can help, quality of life includes much more, such as access to clean water, healthcare, education, and safe housing.

In Jakarta, many low-income residents living in kampungs also lack access to these basic services.

Well done on this task.

I hope you managed to explain that correctly.

This table shows life expectancy across different areas of Jakarta and how it's closely linked to quality of life.

In South Jakarta, people live the longest, around 73 to 75 years.

That's because the area generally has better healthcare, more green spaces and cleaner environments, and more stable jobs.

On the other hand, in North Jakarta, life expectancy is much lower, only 62 to 65 years.

These areas are often overcrowded with poor sanitation and are at risk of flooding, which affect people's health and safety.

You can see a clear pattern.

Areas with high quality of life tend to have longer life expectancy, while those with fewer services and more environmental risks tend to have shorter lifespans.

For comparison, the national average life expectancy in Indonesia is 71.

7 years, so some parts of Jakarta are doing better and others are doing much worse.

Which area of Jakarta has the highest life expectancy? Was A, Central Jakarta? B, South Jakarta? C, East Jakarta? D, North Jakarta? Pause the video here and press play when you're ready to continue.

Excellent.

The answer is B, South Jakarta.

Well done.

Why might life expecting to be lower in West and North Jakarta? Is it A, there are more schools in these two areas? B, they are overcrowded with poor sanitation? C, people earn higher salaries in these areas? Or D, the areas have more green space and better air quality? Pause the video here and press play when you're ready to continue.

Fantastic.

The answer is B, they're overcrowded with poor sanitation.

Well done.

Many low-income areas in Jakarta face pollution, flooding, and poor infrastructure, and this is a major impact on quality of life.

So what problems do they face? 40% of households experience flooding and only 17% have proper sanitation.

Unemployment is twice as high as other areas.

The average income is Rp 3 million, about 147 pound a month.

In some areas, 20 families share a single toilet.

Why is this happening? Often these settlements aren't officially recognised by the government, so they don't get access to basic services or funding.

Now, there's a big question.

Why don't people just move somewhere else if it's too difficult to live here? And the answer is not always easy.

Moving can be expensive, but many people work nearby or have lived in these communities for years and they feel safe and happy, and this is where their community connections are.

Some may not have legal documents or simply have anywhere else to go as they can't afford to move anywhere else.

Let's look at what life looks like in a wealthier area of Jakarta and why these areas offer so much more.

Residents here typically earn around Rp 25 million.

That's about 1,225 pound per month, which is significantly higher than low-income areas.

They also benefit from 90% access to services like healthcare and waste collection, access to private schools, and 3.

5 times more green space than poor areas.

So why is this the case? Wealthy areas are planned from the beginning with space set aside for parks, schools, and utilities.

Because they're profitable, they attract investment both from businesses and the government, which means better infrastructure is built and maintained.

Now, there's a great question here.

Why can't we just add more parks to kampungs? In theory we can, but in reality, kampungs are crowded, unplanned, and built wherever space is available.

There's often no extra land for parks or green space, and the land they're on may not be even legally recognised.

So improving green space in poorer areas takes careful redevelopment, proper planning, and importantly, government support and funding.

Andeep and Sofia are discussing why people continue to live in kampungs even though conditions are poor.

Who is correct? Andeep said, "Because the government hasn't built any new housing, so people have no choice but to stay." Sofia said, "Because many people feel safe and supported in kampungs, even if living conditions are poor." Pause the video here whilst you decide and press play when you're ready to continue.

Fantastic.

Sofia is correct.

I would like you to explain why.

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

Brilliant, the reason why Sofia is correct is because government housing does exist, but many kampung residents choose not to move because of strong community ties and a sense of familiarity.

And many accept risks like flooding and poor sanitation in exchange for staying close to their social networks.

Well done if you explained that correctly.

True or false? Wealthy areas in Jakarta have more green space because residents demand better access to public parks.

Pause the video here whilst you decide 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 is false is because wealthy areas like Pondok Indah and Menteng attract private and government investment because they're profitable.

As a result, they benefit from 3.

5 times more green space, higher quality housing and access to services.

90% of households in these areas have reliable electricity, water, and sewage.

Well done if you managed to explain that correctly.

I would now like you to read each statement in the table and tick true or false.

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

Brilliant.

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

Alex has written an answer to why do wealthier areas in Jakarta have a higher quality of life than poorer kampung areas? I would like you to correct his mistakes.

Alex said, "Wealthy and poor areas have the same life expectancy because everyone in Jakarta uses the same hospitals.

Rich people just have nicer homes, but kampungs have more green space so they're healthier to live in.

Poor areas get more help from the government, so quality of life is similar." 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 read each statement and decide if they're true or false.

For this first statement, poor areas have limited sanitation and face regular flooding is true.

Life expectancy in kampungs is around 77 years is false.

South Jakarta lost over 30% of its green space is true.

High life expectancy is linked to good services and green space is true.

Kampungs have the most reliable water supply is false.

Quality of life is mainly influenced by salary alone is false.

And living near the Ciliwung River poses health risks is true.

Well done on this task.

Let's now check our second task.

I asked you to correct Alex's answer.

For same life expectancy you might have written, life expectancy varies across the city.

For example, in South Jakarta, a wealthy area, it is up to 75 years, but in West Jakarta it's around 64 to 67 years, which is a clear 10-year gap.

Same hospitals, you might have said, wealthy residents have better access to high-quality healthcare, often private or low-income areas often lack reliable medical services.

For kampungs have more green space, you might have said, kampungs are more crowded and have limited green space.

Jakarta lost 33% of its green space between 2000-2020, affecting poorer districts most.

Poor areas get more help, you might have said, government and private investment is concentrating in wealthy areas which have better infrastructure, schools, sanitation, and services.

Well done on this task.

I hope you managed to include some of those points in your answers.

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

What are the challenges of managing inequality? Jakarta is a city of contrasts, and inequality here is the result of deep-rooted social and economic divides that have grown over time.

Take South Jakarta for example.

It's known for its green space, modern housing, private schools, and mostly formal employment with stable jobs and regular pay.

Now, compare that to North Jakarta where you'll find densely packed kampungs, poor sanitation, pollution, and mostly informal work, which is often low paying and insecure.

This contrast isn't accidental.

Development has favoured wealthier areas where investment is profitable and services are well planned.

Meanwhile, poorer communities, especially kampungs, often get left behind without the infrastructure support they need.

By 2025, Jakarta's 11.

6 million residents are facing a city that's increasingly unequal, unless action is taken to ensure development is fair, inclusive, and focus on those who need it most.

Which of the following best describes the difference between South and North Jakarta? A, North Jakarta has more private schools and green space than South Jakarta? B, South Jakarta is known for its kampungs and informal employment? C, North Jakarta experiences poor sanitation and higher pollution levels? D, South Jakarta struggles with overcrowding and lack of modern housing? Pause the video here whilst you decide and press play when you're ready to continue.

Excellent.

The answers are C, North Jakarta experiences poor sanitation and higher pollution levels.

Well done.

Inequality in Jakarta isn't just about money.

It's about how the city manages growth, development, and fairness.

First, rapid development growth puts major pressure on water, power, and transport systems. As more people move in, infrastructure can't always keep up.

Second, flooding and land sinking are getting worse due to overdevelopment, especially on vulnerable land.

These floods now cost the city around $520 million per year in damage and disruption.

Third, when the government tried to relocate kampung residents, it often sparked protests.

In fact, 60% of kampung residents reject relocation.

They fear losing community, jobs, and security in the process.

This reminds us that solving inequality isn't simple.

It's about balancing the needs of different groups, avoiding harm, and making sure change is fair, inclusive, and sustainable.

Which of the following is a consequence of social inequality of Jakarta? Is it A, protests over kampung evictions? B, land subsidence due to overdevelopment? C, lack of city-wide recycling schemes? Or D, seasonal flooding from heavy rainfall? Pause the video here whilst you decide and press play when you're ready to continue.

Excellent.

The answer is A, protest over kampung evictions.

Well done.

Jakarta faces huge challenges from poverty to flooding, but at the same time, the government is spending billions of dollars to build a brand new capital city called Nusantara.

Let's compare.

Jakarta urgently needs $4.

2 billion just for flood defences, 1.

2 million affordable homes, fix the 35% water loss from leaking pipes, a $6.

5 billion infrastructure upgrade, and better education, only 60% of kampung residents currently have.

Meanwhile, Nusantara is costing 30 billion overall with plans to move 16,000 civil servants in 2024.

It's designed to be 65% green space powered by 75% renewables and include $1.

5 billion in smart technology.

So here's the key question.

Can Indonesia truly tackle inequality in Jakarta while putting so much funding and focus into Nusantara? It's a debate about priorities.

Should more be done to improve conditions where people already live or is investing in a future city the best long-term plan? The government has launched a range of reforms to improve Jakarta and reduce inequality, but not all of them are progressing smoothly.

This chart shows a mix of actions that are ongoing, stalled, or still just promised.

For example, flood defences are making progress, but they are one of the few projects marked as ongoing.

But kampung upgrades, transport links, and affordable housings have stalled.

Other pledges like government decentralisation haven't started at all.

Meanwhile, massive resources are going to Nusantara, the new capital, shown here in orange as promised, but already taking attention and funding.

So what's going wrong? Some key challenges are corruption, slowing down progress, budget problems, delaying upgrades, and a major focus on Nusantara, which is pulling resources away from where they are urgently needed in Jakarta.

So yes, reforms are underway, but their actual impact on inequality remains uncertain.

Without consistent funding, transparency, and follow through, real change may still be out of reach for many residents.

True or false? The government is spending more on building Nusantara than on solving Jakarta's inequality issues like housing, flooding, and education? Pause the video here whilst you decide and press play when you're ready to continue.

Excellent.

This statement is true.

I would like you to explain why.

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

Fantastic, the reason why it's true is because the total cost of Nusantara is estimated at 30 billion.

At the same time, Jakarta needs 4.

2 billion for flood defences, 6.

5 billion for infrastructure, and 1.

2 million affordable homes, but much of this remains underfunded.

This highlights a funding imbalance in trying to tackle inequality in Jakarta.

Well done if you managed to explain that correctly.

Why is the impact of Jakarta's government reforms on inequality still uncertain? Is it A, all reforms have been successfully completed? B, progress has slowed as a result of Nusantara? C, Jakarta no longer has inequality issues? Or D, all government spending is on kampung upgrades? Pause the video here whilst you decide and press play when you're ready to continue.

Fantastic.

The answer is B, progress has slowed as a result of Nusantara.

Well done on this task.

You've done brilliantly.

The Indonesian government is successfully managing inequality in Jakarta.

I would like you to place a cross on the line representing your opinion, whether you agree or disagree, and then justify your opinion.

Use information from this lesson and your own research to support your answer.

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

Excellent.

Let's check our answers.

Your response could look something like this.

I have placed it closer to the disagree side.

Your response may look something like this.

I disagree with the statement.

While the government has introduced reforms like flood defences and proposed affordable housing, the impact has been limited.

The kampung upgrades have stalled and transport link expansion is only promised, showing that not all plans are being delivered.

The government is also spending 30 billion on building Nusantara, the new capital, while Jakarta still faces urgent needs like $6.

5 billion of infrastructure upgrades and a shortage of 1.

2 million affordable homes.

Corruption and budget problems have slowed progress and only 60% of kampung residents access education.

These challenges show that inequality is not being effectively managed at present.

Well done on this task.

I hope you managed to include some of those points in your answer.

Now comes the end of our learning on urban patterns in Jakarta, and you've done brilliantly.

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

Rapid population growth has created significant inequalities in Jakarta's residential areas.

People in poorer areas face overcrowding, flooding, and poor sanitation.

There are significant quality of life differences, with low-income areas often lacking basic services.

Government reforms aim to reduce inequality, but many have stalled, and the move to a new capital city, Nusantara, is drawing funds away from Jakarta's urgent needs.

Well done in this lesson, you've done brilliantly, and I look forward to learning with you again very soon.