Time New Roman 14, Space 1

Sumatra Journal of Disaster, Geography and Geography Education, Month, Year Vol.00, Issue 00, pp.000-000
Disaster, Geography, Geography Education http://sjdgge.ppj.unp.ac.id/index.php/Sjdgge 
ISSN : 2580 - 4030 ( Print ) 2580 - 1775 ( Online), Indonesia

 A POLICY MODEL OF RISKS THE VOLCANO ERUPTION DISASTER OF SINABUNG IN KARO REGENCY - INDONESIA

*Dedi Hermon1 2, Ganefri2, Erianjoni2 3, Indang Dewata 2 4, Paus Iskarni1, Alexander Syam2 5

Time New Roman 10, Space 1

*1Department of Geography – Padang State University, Indonesia
2Postgraduate - Padang State University, Indonesia
3Department of Sosiology – Padang State University, Indonesia
4Department of Chemistry – Padang State University, Indonesia
5STIKIP Pesisir Selatan, Indonesia

*Corresponding Author, Received: - , Revised: -, Accepted: -

Time New Roman 10, Space 1

ABSTRACT: The purpose of this research was to determine the level of volcano eruption risk and compile a disaster risk mitigation model for the Sinabung volcano eruption. Analysis technique of volcano eruption disaster risk of Sinabung uses scoring techniques for all indicators. The volcano eruption disaster risk of Sinabung refers to eruption hazard level, vulnerability level, and disaster prevention capacity index. The level of volcano eruption hazard and vulnerability of Sinabung volcano was analyzed by GIS approach using ArcGIS 10.1 software, based on units of sub-district administration. The capacity index was analyzed based on the Hyogo Framework for Action-HFA 2005-2015. While the disaster mitigation and policy model of adaptation of volcano eruption Sinabung were analyzed with FGD and AHP. The level of volcano eruption disaster risk of Sinabung is high > 49 (614). As for the mitigation model of the eruption risk of Sinabung volcano and model of adaptation policy based on alternative priorities for disaster risk reduction has 4 main priorities, i.e: 1) Relocation for identify, assess and monitor of disaster risk and implement an early warning system; 2) Utilize of knowledge, innovation and education to build a culture of safety and resilience at all levels; 3) Make of disaster risk reduction a priority of national and region implemented through strong institutions; and 4) the reducing of underlying factors that increase disaster risk.

Keywords: Sinabung Volcano, Disaster Risk, Mitigation Model, Karo Regency

Time New Roman 10, Space 1

1.	INTRODUCTION

The Indonesian archipelago state is also traversed by two active lanes in the world, the Pacific and Mediterranean circums. The Pacific Circum includes islands in Sulawesi island the northern part and Maluku the northern part. The Mediterranean circums is divided into two parts, the arc in the active (inner arc) and the outer arc that is no longer active. Inner arc Mediterranean circuits include volcanoes found on the mainland of Sumatra, Java, Bali, Lombok, Nusatenggara, part of Sulawesi island and ending in the Banda Sea. The outer arc of the Mediterranean (outer arc) encompasses the islands in Sumatra island the western part such as Mentawai archipelago, Nias archipelago, Enggano island continues to the southern coast of Java island, and Nusatenggara islands cover the Sumba island [1].
One of the active volcano that recently showed its activity is the Sinabung volcano. Sinabung volcano in Karo language "Delen Gunung Sinabung" is a volcano in the Karo highlands, Karo Regency, North Sumatra - Indonesia. [2] [3] adds Sinabung volcano close to Sibayak mount are two active volcanoes in North Sumatra and become the highest peak in the province of North Sumatra, with the height of the mountain is around 2.460 meters. [4] explained the feasibility of the evacuation route for the risk adaptation of the Sinabung volcano in Kato Regency is done by Network Analysis which is found in the Arc GIS 10.1 program. Where Network Analysis a system of linear features that are interrelated in each constituent element where a flow of movement in a network system besides that it is also analyzed 1) number of settlements; 2) population; 3) length of the line; and 4) accessibility and feasibility of evacuation routes.
Sinabung volcano has not been recorded erupting since 1.600 years [5], but suddenly active again and erupted at the date of August 27, 2010, this mountain released smoke and volcanic ash. On August 29, 2010 at around At 00:15 pm, this mountain release volcanic fumes and ash. The status of the mountain is raised to "Beware".
Twelve thousand residents around nearby are evacuated and accommodated in 8 locations. The sound of this eruption was heard up to a distance of 8 kilometres. This volcanic dust is sprayed up to 5,000 meters in the air [6]. Based on TRIBUNE NEWS media reports (2015) the ash of Sinabung volcano tends to slide from the southwest headed the northeast. The partially of Medan city is also covered with ash from Sinabung volcano. Kualanamu and Polonia Airport in Medan City reportedly did experience air travel disruption. One person reportedly died of a respiratory disorder while evacuating from his home. The results of the eruption of Sinabung volcano emit a thick black smog accompanied by the rain of sand and volcanic ash that covers thousands of hectares of farmers' crops that are below a radius of 6 kilometres.
Volcanic dust causes many of the farmers' crops on the mountain slopes to die and damage. An estimated 15.341 Ha of agricultural crops are threatened with crop failure. Gray volcanic dust has covered the forest, villages, and surrounding agricultural land [7], so that the author's mind appeared to research there is a whether danger of volcanic dust to the health of local society, agricultural crops, and livestock of local society.

Time New Roman 10, Space 1

2.	RESEARCH METHODS 

2.1 Volcano eruption risk level of Sinabung

To see the volcano eruption risk level of Sinabung seen from 3 elements, i.e: 1) the volcanic eruption hazard level; 2) the volcanic eruption vulnerability level; and 3) the capacity of handling capacity the volcano eruption of Sinabung in Karo Regency. The volcano eruption risk level of Sinabung is analyzed in each sub-district administrative unit with a scooring method against the volcanic eruption hazard indicator according to the Regulation of the BNPB No. 02 of 2012 based on the danger indicator of volcanic eruption.

2.2 Policy model of adaptation mitigation and social risk of the volcano eruption of Sinabung

The formulation of a policy model for mitigating the risk the volcano eruption of Sinabung in Karo Regency is carried out descriptively based on the results of research that has been carried out as a criterion for the formulation of a mitigation policy model, i.e: 1) the volcano eruption hazard level of Sinabung; 2) the volcano eruption vulnerability level of Sinabung; and 3) the volcano eruption risk level of Sinabung. The formulation of the volcano eruption mitigation policy model of Sinabung is classified into several stages, i.e: 1) the compile of mitigation policy alternative the volcanic eruption of Sinabung based on further development of primary and secondary data research, in the form of a description of things that must be developed into public policy priorities [8-10]; 2) the formulate of priorities for the volcano eruption mitigation policy of Sinabung [11-13]; and 3) the selection of priorities the volcanic eruption mitigation policy of Sinabung through alternative selection to be made a priority by Bayes method and Focus Group Discussion (FGD) [14-17].

Time New Roman 10, Space 1

3.	RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

3.1 Volcano eruption risk level of Sinabung

Based on the eruption nature and circumstances of the Sinabung volcano, then the potential eruption hazards that may occur are 1) pyroclastic flow (hot clouds); 2) pyroclastic falls (the bursts of incandescent rock and ash rain); and 3) lava flows [18-23]. [24] adds based on the hazard level of Sinabung volcano eruption that might happen, the region of the disaster-prone of Sinabung volcano can be divided into three of the vulnerability level from low to high, however based on the analysis of the eruption hazard indicator according to Head Regulation, Agency of National Disaster Management (BNPB) No. 02 of 2012 the volcano eruption risk level of Sinabung belongs on the medium and high hazard levels (Tabel 1).

Time New Roman 10, Space 1

Table 1	The Volcano Eruption Risk Levels of Sinabung

No						
										
1										
2										
3										
4										
5										
6										
7										
8										
9										
10										
11										
12										
Source: Results of data analysis, 2018.

The volcano eruption hazard levels of the highest Sinabung i.e in the sub-district of Namanteran, Dolatrayat, Barusjahe, Berastagi, Merdeka, and Tiganderket. As for the volcano eruption vulnerability levels of Sinabung based on Head Regulation BNPB No. 02 of 2012 with indicator of the vulnerability i.e: 1) population density; 2) female sex ratio (%); 3) ratio of age groups 0-14 years and > 64 years (%); 4) ratio of disabled people (%); 5) ratio of poor households (%); 6) the land area of productive (rice fields/agriculture, moor/shrubs, mixed garden) (Ha); 6) number of livestock (tail); 7) number of houses (units); 8) number of public facilities (education, health, and offices) (units); and 9) the land use, where the result is the highest level of vulnerability located in the sub-district of Berastagi and Kabanjahe. While to the disaster management capability index of the highest volcano eruption of Sinabung is in the sub-district of Simpang Empat, Payung, Kabanjahe, Mardingding, and Namanteran. Based on the map analysis of the volcano eruption risk levels of Sinabung. Showing that in the sub-district of Mardingding, Tiganderket, Dolatrayat, Kabanjahe, and Barusjahe are in the high category or the hazard (Beware). The map of disaster risk levels is obtained based on the results of the map analysis of hazard, map of vulnerability, and map of index capacity that can be seen on the map Fig.1 below.

Time New Roman 10, Space 1

Fig.1 Map of The Volcano Eruption Risk Level of Sinabung.

Based on data records from the Agency of Center Statistics (BPS) of 2017. Demographically, Karo Regency has a population growth rate of 2.3% every year. [25] state that high population growth in a region will create conflict between land uses. [1] adds based on Law No. 24 of 2007 concerning disaster management states that mitigation is a series of efforts to reduce disaster risk. Based on the results of the analysis shows that there are three main alternatives to the direction of disaster mitigation policy, i.e: disaster education, increased socialization in disaster-prone zones, and disaster-based spatial planning.

3.2 Policy model of adaptation mitigation and social risk of the volcano eruption of Sinabung

Disaster mitigation is an effort made to prevent disasters or reduce the impact of disasters which include preparedness and vigilance as the volcano eruption disaster mitigation model of Sinabung is based on the results of FGD with the society, Agency of National Disaster Management (BNPB), Agency of Sub-National Level Disaster Management (BPBD), Agency of Development Planning of Sub-National Level (BAPPEDA), and NGOs regarding disaster mitigation for sub-districts included in the hazard (Fig 2).

Fig. 2 Policy Model of Adaptation Mitigation and Social Risk of The Volcano Eruption of Sinabung.

Based on the analysis of the volcano eruption disaster risk mitigation and policy model of adaptation of Sinabung volcano in Karo Regency, it can be seen from spatial planning, mitigation, and adaptation that alternative priorities for disaster risk reduction are 4 main priorities, i.e: 1) Relocation identifying, assessing, monitoring disaster risk, and implementing an early warning system; 2) Utilizing knowledge, innovation, and education to build a culture of safety and resilience at all levels; 3) Making "Disaster Risk Reduction/DRR" a national and regional priority implemented through strong institutions; and 4) Reducing factors fundamental causes of the emergence or increase of disaster risk. [26] stated one effort to reduce the impact of disaster risk by increasing the capacity of the society in dealing with disasters. [27-30] explained disaster education and increased socialization in disaster-prone zones as an indicator to increase society capacity in reducing disaster risk. Enhancement the society capacity to reduce the volcano eruption risk disaster of Sinabung in Karo Regency can be implemented by including disaster education in the school curriculum. With including disaster education curriculum to the society in disaster-prone regions is an effective effort to reduce the risk of disasters. [31-34] states that including disaster education in all elements of society can reduce 40-60% of losses due to disasters. In addition, [35-38] adds that one solution mitigates the vulnerability region of the volcanic eruption disaster by entering the element of disaster in the preparation of spatial planning. This is in accordance with the direction of disaster mitigation policies by including disaster-based spatial planning. 

Time New Roman 10, Space 1

4.	CONCLUSION

The volcano eruption disaster risk levels of Sinabung in Karo District is high because > 49 (614), this result is also in line with the IRB BNPB which suggests that the volcano eruption disaster risk level of Sinabung in Karo Regency is high. The volcano of Sinabung in Karo Regency experienced an increase in the volcanic eruption disaster from the frequency of occurrence and the region affected by volcanic ash. Where the volcanic dust that hit the region resulted in many farmers' plants that were on the slopes of the mountain that were dead and damaged. The grayish white volcanic dust covered the forest, village and surrounding agricultural land. The high intensity of volcanic ash distribution and conversion of forest regions to other uses is a factor that causes carbon uptake to be unstable.  About 15.341 Ha of the Karo Regency region is a high hazard level zone against the disaster of volcanic eruptions with settlement regions that are built in high hazard zones are around 27%. Efforts to reduce risk by using disaster risk mitigation and adaptation policy of the volcano eruption in Sinabung, i.e: relocation, disaster education, increasing socialization in disaster-prone zones, and disaster-based spatial planning. It was suggested to the Karo Regency government to include disaster education curricula starting from the elementary to secondary schools, conducting socialization in disaster-prone zones, and conducting disaster-based spatial planning.

Time New Roman 10, Space 1

5.	Acknowledgements

This research can be carried out smoothly, because of the help and cooperation of various parties. Therefore, the author would like to thank the Rector of Padang State University and the Government of Karo Regency - North Sumatra Province who have provided the opportunity and time to sharpen the academic ability us, especially in the field of volcanic disasters.

Time New Roman 10, Space 1

6.	referenceS

[1]	Hermon D. Geografi Bencana Alam. Jakarta: PT RajaGrafindo Persada, 2015.
[2]	Hermon D. Desain Kebijakan Tanggap Darurat dan Pemulihan Bencana Letusan Gunung Sinabung. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Geografi: Master Program of Geography Education, Universitas Negeri Padang. 2014.
[3]	González P J., Singh K D and Tiampo K F. Shallow hydrothermal pressurization before the 2010 eruption of Mount Sinabung Volcano, Indonesia, observed by use of ALOS satellite radar interferometry. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 172(11), 2015, pp. 3229-3245.
[4]	Putra A and Mutmainah H. The Mapping of Temporary Evacuation Site (TES) and Tsunami Evacuation Route in North Pagai Island, Mentawai Islands Regency-Indonesia. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 47(1), 2016, pp. 012020.
[5]	Haerani N., Basuki A., Suparman Y., Primulyana S., Prambada O., Loeqman A and Ohkura T. Evaluation of volcanic activity at Sinabung volcano, after more than 400 years of quiet. Journal of Disaster Research, 7(1), 2012, pp. 37.
[6]	Gunawan H., Budianto A., Prambada O., McCausland W., Pallister J and Iguchi M. Overview of the eruptions of Sinabung eruption, 2010 and 2013–present and details of the 2013 phreatomagmatic phase. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 2017.
[7]	Alfian Z., Zaidar Nst E and Taufiq M. Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Heavy Metal and Mineral of Volcanic Ashmount Sinabung by Using Inductively Coupled Plasma (Icp-Oes). Der Pharma Chemica, 9(5), 2017, pp.18-22.
[8]	Aspinall W and Blong R. Volcanic risk assessment. The Encyclopedia of Volcanoes (Second Edition), 2015, pp. 1215-1231.
[9]	Gultom D I. Trustworthy and participatory community-based disaster communication: a case study of Jalin Merapi in the 2010 Merapi eruption in Indonesia, 2016.
[10]	Pean T Y. A framework to improve the product development process to achieve more effective sanitation response during emergencies, 2016.
[11]	Eriyatno S F. Riset Kebijakan; Metode Penelitian Untuk Pascasarjana. Bogor (ID): IPB Pr, 2007.
[12]	Sadyohutomo M. Manajemen kota dan wilayah: realita & tantangan. Bumi Aksara, 2008.
[13]	Andreastuti S., Paripurno E., Gunawan H., Budianto A., Syahbana D and Pallister J. Character of community response to volcanic crises at Sinabung and Kelud volcanoes. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 2017.,
[14]	Hermon D. Dinamika Permukiman dan Arahan Kebijakan Pengembangan Permukiman pada Kawasan Rawan Longsor di Kota Padang. Disertasi, 2009, IPB Bogor.
[15]	Hermon D. Impacts of land cover change on climate trend in Padang Indonesia. Indonesian Journal of Geography, 46(2), 2014, pp. 138-142.
[16]	Hermon D. Climate Change Mitigation. Rajawali Pers (Radjagrafindo). Jakarta, 2017.
[17]	Lestari P., Paripurno E T and Nugroho A R. B. Disaster Risk Reduction Based on Community through a Contingency Plan for Mount Sinabung. Jurnal Ilmu Sosial dan Ilmu Politik, 21(3), 2018, pp. 231-245.
[18]	Moore J G and Melson W G. Nuees ardentes of the 1968 eruption of Mayon volcano, Philippines. Bulletin Volcanologique, 33(2), 1969, pp. 600-620.
[19]	Ratdomopurbo A and Poupinet G. An overview of the seismicity of Merapi volcano (Java, Indonesia), 1983–1994. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 100(1-4), 2000, pp. 193-214.
[20]	Calder E S., Luckett R., Sparks R S J and Voight B. Mechanisms of lava dome instability and generation of rockfalls and pyroclastic flows at Soufriere Hills Volcano, Montserrat. Geological Society, London, Memoirs, 21(1), 2002, pp 173-190.
[21]	Blong R J. Volcanic hazards: a sourcebook on the effects of eruptions. 2013, Elsevier.
[22]	Sutawidjaja I S., Prambada O and Siregar D. A. The August 2010 Phreatic Eruption of Mount Sinabung, North Sumatra. Indonesian Journal on Geoscience, 8(1), 2013, pp. 55-61.
[23]	Magsi H., Torre A., Liu Y and Sheikh M J. Land use conflicts in the developing countries: proximate driving forces and preventive measures. The Pakistan Development Review, 56(1), 2017, pp.19-30.
[24]	Nakada S., Zaennudin A., Yoshimoto M., Maeno F., Suzuki Y., Hokanishi N and Triastuty H. Growth process of the lava dome/flow complex at Sinabung Volcano during 2013–2016. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 2017.
[25]	Adila I., Dewi W W A., Tamitiadini D and Syauki W R. Disaster mitigation action plan: Digital media on improving accountability and community relationships. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 70(1), 2017. pp. 012016,
[26]	Dekens J. Local knowledge for disaster preparedness: A literature review. International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD), 2007. 
[27]	Suroso D S A., Sagala S A., Alberdi H A and Wulandari Y. Does Social Protection on Education Increase the Capacity of Communities in Facing Disasters?. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 158(1), 2018, pp. 012036.
[28]	Witvorapong N., Muttarak R and Pothisiri W. Social participation and disaster risk reduction behaviors in tsunami prone areas. PLoS one, 10(7), 2015. e0130862.
[29]	Kusumastuti R D., Husodo Z A., Suardi L and Danarsari D N. Developing a resilience index towards natural disasters in Indonesia. International journal of disaster risk reduction, 10, 2014, pp. 327-340.
[30]	Miceli R., Sotgiu I and Settanni M. Disaster preparedness and perception of flood risk: A study in an alpine valley in Italy. Journal of environmental psychology, 28(2), 2008. pp 164-173.
[31]	Pourhosseini S S., Ardalan A and Mehrolhassani M H. Key aspects of providing healthcare services in disaster response stage. Iranian journal of public health, 44(1), 2015, pp. 111.
[32]	Witvorapong N., Muttarak R and Pothisiri W. Social participation and disaster risk reduction behaviors in tsunami prone areas. PLoS one, 10(7), 2015, e0130862.
[33]	Achora S and Kamanyire J K. Disaster Preparedness: Need for inclusion in undergraduate nursing education. Sultan Qaboos University Medical Journal, 16(1), 2016. e15.
[34]	Perry R W and Lindell M K. Preparedness for emergency response: guidelines for the emergency planning process. Disasters, 27(4), 2003. pp. 336-350.
[35]	Van Westen C J. Remote sensing and GIS for natural hazards assessment and disaster risk management. Treatise on geomorphology, 3, pp. 259-298, 2013.
[36]	Dewata I and Adri Z. "Water Quality Assessment and Determining the Carrying Capacity of Pollution Load Batang Kuranji River." In IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, vol. 335, no. 1, p. 012027. IOP Publishing, 2018.
[37]	Andreastuti S., Paripurno E., Gunawan H., Budianto A., Syahbana D and Pallister J. Character of community response to volcanic crises at Sinabung and Kelud volcanoes. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research. 2017.
[38]	Maharani Y N., Lee S and Ki S J. Social vulnerability at a local level around the Merapi volcano. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 20, 2016, pp. 63-77.