Dynamic Land Resources Management at the Mount Kelud, Indonesia

Abstract

There is a contradictive situation between the theory that believes that high volcanic hazard areas should be for limited production zones and those areas that are intensively utilised for several production activities. This paper tries to discuss that contradictive situation from both the perspective of natural hazards and natural resources, therefore, the best options for the land utilisation pattern might be formulated at these high volcanic hazards areas. We conducted landscape analysis that covers volcanic morphology, volcanic materials, and both natural and artificial processes that modify the morphology and materials characteristics. The natural processes occurring in the high volcanic hazard might cover non-volcanic processes such as erosion and landslide. The artificial processes were usually considered as land utilisation activities by the local community. In such areas where both natural and artificial processes occurred, we conducted in-depth interviews to assess the community perception on thread and benefits of the last Kelud Eruption in February 2014. We evaluated the current land resources utilisation and portrayed the local adaptive land resource utilisation. There were three types of land resources available at the active volcano: space, natural scenery, and volcanic materials. The availability of these land resources was in a dynamic condition both in terms of quality and quantity. Immediately after the eruption, the natural scenery made the area attractive as a tourist destination. Following the high intensity of rainfall, the volcanic materials might be used as high-quality construction materials. The available space might be utilised for any purposes after the situation became relatively stable. The current space was mostly used for agricultural enterprises which accommodates the physical and socio-cultural characteristics of the active volcano environment.

Livelihoods, Wellbeing and the Risk to Life During Volcanic Eruptions

“…This trajectory is most clearly seen for volcanoes with repeat eruptions across this time period. Tourists are drawn to the spectacle of a volcanic landscape (Bachri et al, 2015;Wardhani et al, 2017) and bring with them opportunities to act as their guide or to provide services to the passing traffic. This provides a strong incentive to continue to live and work in high hazard zones.…”

“…This provides a strong incentive to continue to live and work in high hazard zones. For example, in an analysis of land resource management around Kelud volcano, Wardhani et al (2017) identify a near doubling of visitors between 2010 and 2014 and highlight the particular draw of a volcanic landscape in the few years immediately succeeding an eruption as a strong incentive to exploit this interest. Tourism was also a strong incentive to re-occupy land on Fogo (de Castro and Martins, 2018) and Merapi (Mei et al, 2016).…”

Relationship of knowledge to preparedness students in disaster prone areas of Merapi Mountain eruption (Case study of SMA Negeri 1 Cangkringan)

“…The continued risk of a volcanic eruption threatens the communities living in active volcanoes. It can happen at anytime and potentially destroy everything in the surrounding area [5]. Merapi Volcano covers four administrative areas: Klaten Regency, Boyolali Regency, Magelang Regency in Central Java Province, and Sleman Regency, which is in the Province of the Special Region of Yogyakarta (DIY).…”

Community Empowerment through Research, Innovation and Open Access

“…The post-eruption of Mount Kelud in 2014 has a significant impact on the building material sector; a large number of river flows upstream on the peak area of the Kelud volcano by carrying large amounts of volcanic material resulting from eruptions has the potential to increase the population's economy (Wardhani et al 2017). Agricultural conditions were developed by the people of Kediri and Blitar Regencies through planting pineapple plants.…”