achieving a system of competitive cities in malaysia...
TRANSCRIPT
Ku
ala
Lu
mp
ur
| Joh
or
Ba
hr
u | G
eo
rg
e T
ow
n | K
ua
nt
an
| Ko
ta
Kin
ab
alu
| Ku
ch
ing
Achieving a Systemof Competitive Cities in Malaysia
Annexes
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
Pub
lic D
iscl
osur
e A
utho
rized
World Bank Reimbursable Advisory Service Social, Urban, Rural, and Resilience Global Practice
November 2015
Achieving a Systemof Competitive Cities in Malaysia
Annexes
For further information refer to:
Director General,Economic Planning UnitPrime Minister’s DepartmentBlock B5 & B6Federal Government Administrative Centre62502 PUTRAJAYA
Website: www.epu.gov.my
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, copied, stored in any retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means - electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise; without prior permission of Economic Planning Unit, Prime Minister’s Department, Malaysia.
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Tables .................................................................................................................................................. 4
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................................. 5
List of Boxes ................................................................................................................................................... 5
1. Data Resources for Economic Analysis (Annex for Chapter 2) ........................................................................ 71.1. Data Utilization ......................................................................................................................................................... 7
1.1.1. Data received from the Government of Malaysia ..................................................................................71.1.2. What have we done with the government data? ...................................................................................7
2. Additional Information on Spatial Analysis (Annex for Chapter 3) ................................................................. 82.1. Standardized Groupings of Land Use Classes .......................................................................................................... 82.2. Technical Recommendations on the Management of GIS Data in Malaysia ...........................................................92.3. Modelling the impact of Malay Reserve Land on housing affordability in Johor Bahru ........................................11
3. Institutional Issues (Annexes for Chapter 4) ............................................................................................. 143.1. Institutional Mapping.............................................................................................................................................. 143.2. List of Meetings for Institutional Analysis ............................................................................................................. 813.3. Institutional Analysis: Selected Global Case Studies ............................................................................................ 82
3.3.1. Case study one: Decentralization in Indonesia ................................................................................. 823.3.2. Case study two: Decentralization in Mexico ...................................................................................... 853.3.3. Case study three: Decentralization in Spain ...................................................................................... 87
3.4. Metropolitan Management – Approaches and Implications .................................................................................893.4.1 Why metropolitan management matters for Malaysia ...................................................................... 893.4.2. The need for metropolitan governance through political transformation .........................................913.4.3. Metropolitan governance models ....................................................................................................... 923.4.4. Global experiences .............................................................................................................................. 923.4.5. Metropolitan (regional) authority: city examples .............................................................................. 973.4.6. Metropolitan-level planning through non-governmental organizations ........................................... 983.4.7. Metropolitan-level / regional government: city examples ................................................................. 993.4.8. Consolidated local government: city examples ............................................................................... 1023.4.9. Large infrastructure projects: special situations ............................................................................. 1033.4.10. Lessons learned and policy implications ......................................................................................... 104
3.5. Mayor’s Wedge Analysis for Greater KL/KV PBTs ................................................................................................. 1073.5.1. The Mayor’s wedge framework: a standardized framework for city governments ......................... 1073.5.2. Overview: Greater Kuala Lumpur and Klang Valley PBTs ................................................................ 1083.5.3. Malaysia’s intergovernmental environment ......................................................................................1103.5.4. Economic development strategy ....................................................................................................... 1123.5.5. City service delivery ...........................................................................................................................1143.5.6. Business regulations and licensing ...................................................................................................119
3.6. Examples of Formulae for Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfers ........................................................................... 1203.6.1. Formulae for Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfers in Australia ....................................................... 120
4 Annexes
3.6.2. Formulae for Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfers in Indonesia .......................................................1223.7. Annex 3 References ............................................................................................................................................... 125
4. Social Exclusion (Annexes for Chapter 5) ................................................................................................. 1314.1. Field Work Implementation Details .......................................................................................................................131
4.1.1. Calendar of events for qualitative field work .................................................................................... 1314.1.2. Summary of participants in focus group discussions .......................................................................1334.1.3. Focus group discussion questionnaire ..............................................................................................1344.1.4. Guidelines for focus group discussions............................................................................................ 1364.1.5. General Structure of the Focus Group Discussion ............................................................................1374.1.6. List of agencies in round table discussions ......................................................................................1384.1.7. Agenda: Agency Meeting: EPU November 3rd, 2014 ........................................................................1384.1.8. List of Civil Society Organizations in Malaysia working with youth at risk .................................... 139
4.2. List of Federal Government Programs for Youth .................................................................................................. 1434.3. Case Study: England supports affordable housing through land planning and policy ....................................... 1474.4. Annex 4 References ............................................................................................................................................... 148
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1: Land use classifications by city............................................................................................................................9Table 2-2: Estimated increase in rents and land values when MRL is excluded from urbanization ................................ 13Table 3-1: Institutional Map - Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur ..................................................................................... 14Table 3-2: Institutional Map: Federal Territory of Putrajaya ............................................................................................. 22Table 3-3: Institutional Map: Selangor................................................................................................................................30Table 3-4: Institutional Map: Penang State ........................................................................................................................40Table 3-5: Institutional Map: Iskandar Malaysia Region, Johor .........................................................................................48Table 3-6: Institutional Map: East Coast Economic Corridor area / Pahang .....................................................................56Table 3-7: Institutional Map: Kota Kinabalu, Sabah ...........................................................................................................64Table 3-8: Institutional Map: Kuching, Sarawak ................................................................................................................. 72Table 3-9: Meetings for Institutional Analysis .................................................................................................................... 81Table 3-10: Metropolitan governance models ......................................................................................................................94Table 3-11: Characteristics of metropolitan authorities ...................................................................................................... 97Table 3-12: Allocation of expenditure responsibilities for metropolitan-wide vs. local service provision .....................106Table 3-13: Comparing the mayor’s wedge of South Africa, Indonesia and Malaysia ...................................................... 110Table 3-14: DAU Variable Weights, 2011 ............................................................................................................................ 123Table 4-1: Calendar of events for quantitative field work .................................................................................................131Table 4-2: City by city gender participation .................................................................................................................... 133Table 4-3: City by city ethnicity breakdown of participants ........................................................................................... 134Table 4-4: Educational attainment among focus group participants .............................................................................. 134Table 4-5: Structured questionnaire for the study on social inclusion ........................................................................... 135Table 4-6: Agencies in round table discussions ............................................................................................................... 138Table 4-7: CSOs in Malaysia working with youth at risk .................................................................................................. 139Table 4-8: Federal government programs for youth ......................................................................................................... 133
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 5
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1: Malay Reserve Land and FELDA land in Johor Bahru conurbation ....................................................................11Figure 2-2: The urban economics model on the impacts of Malay Reserve Land ...............................................................12Figure 3-1: Greater Kuala Lumpur jurisdictions ................................................................................................................... 91Figure 3-2: The Mayor’s Wedge Framework (scope and capacity) ....................................................................................108Figure 3-3: Greater Kuala Lumpur/Klang Valley PBTs ........................................................................................................109Figure 3-4: Density compared to two transit factors ......................................................................................................... 276Figure 3-5: Greater Manchester .......................................................................................................................................... 118Figure 3-6: LEPs in the UK ................................................................................................................................................... 119Figure 3-7 Allocation Process of DAK ................................................................................................................................ 125Figure 4-1: City by city participants in focus group discussions ...................................................................................... 133Figure 4-2: Proportion of focus group discussants working .............................................................................................. 134
LIST OF BOXES
Box 3-1: Greater Vancouver Regional District: An evolutionary approach to regional, district-based metropolitan planning & management ....................................................................................................................................99
Box 3-2: New York Metropolitan Region: A legitimized civil society approach to megapolitan planning: the pioneering role of the regional planning association ............................................................................... 101
Box 3-3: Seoul Metropolitan Government: Leadership from the metropolitan core .................................................... 105Box 3-4: Selected recommendations for teen and young adult unemployment in U.S. cities ..................................... 114Box 3-5: Polycentricity and public transport: Los Angeles and Seoul .......................................................................... 116Box 3-6: Greater Manchester Combined Authority ........................................................................................................ 118Box 3-7: Regional arrangements for local authorities in the UK ................................................................................... 119
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 7
1. DATA RESOURCES FOR ECONOMIC ANALYSIS (ANNEX FOR CHAPTER 2)
1.1 Data Utilization
1.1.1 Data received from the Government of Malaysia
» Population Census: for 2000 and 2010, disaggregated to the mukim level. [data and shape files]
» Household Expenditure Survey: for 2009/10, data at the conurbation level provided recently.
» Household Income Survey: for 2012, data at the conurbation level provided recently.
» Economic Census: for 2010, at the conurbation level, for manufacturing and services.
» Labor Force Survey: for 2008-2012, at state-level, with rural-urban differentiation.
1.1.2 What have we done with the government data?
1. Population Census:
» Calculated population density at conurbation level;
» Constructed the density gradient of each conurbation, which exhibits the population density by distance from the city center;
» Density gradients reflect the spatial form of cities, shaped by interactions between land markets, public investment, and regulations;
» Spatial structure can have important impacts on economic efficiency of cities — deficient spatial structure fragments labor and consumer markets, contributes to higher transactions costs by unnecessarily increasing distances between people and places, and increases the length of infrastructure network and as a result raises capital and operating costs.
2. Household Expenditure Survey:
» Calculated the cost of living in terms of share of transport and housing cost in total household expenditure;
» Association with productivity of conurbations.
3. Economic Census:
» The total factor productivity (TFP) by conurbation and industry, and its relation with economic density, education attainment, employment structure (ratio of non-Malay employees), ownership and legal status;
» Labor share and production structure;
» Capital intensity, return to capital and access to capital;
» Industrial specialization of conurbations using location quotient;
8 Annexes
» Clustering of the six selected conurbations in the “sunset” and “sunrise” industries.
4. Labor Force Survey:
» Combined with Economic Census data;
» Analyzed education attainment by conurbation and industry (2-Digit level);
» Examined how it is related to productivity and household income in respective conurbation and industry.
5. Other data sources: Oxford Economics Global Cities Dataset, World Bank East Asia Urban Expansion Dataset, CEIC Malaysia data, and Global Risk Data Platform from United Nations Environment Programme for calculat-ing:
» Benchmarking with other large cities in the region;
» Economic density (measured by value of production per km2 and jobs per km2), industrial structure and productivity;
» Relation between public amenities and productivity;
» Capital investment at the state level;
» Built-up land in urban agglomerations with populations of 100,000 or more from satellites image data;
» Economic density as measured by GDP per km2.
2. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON SPATIAL ANALYSIS (ANNEX FOR CHAPTER 3)
2.1 Standardized Groupings of Land Use Classes
6. GIS data on current (“semasa”) land use were obtained as follows:
» Greater Kuala Lumpur: from DBKL for the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur (FTKL), and JPBD Selangor for the eight local authority areas adjacent to FTKL
» Johor Bahru: from JPBD Johor
» George Town: from JPBD Pulau Pinang
» Kota Kinabalu: from DBKK
7. As the land use classes used by each of these data sources varied somewhat, the classifications were standardized as shown in the table below.
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 9
Table 2-1 Land use classifications by city
Standardized Greater Kuala Lumpur Johor Bahru George Town Kota Kinabalu
Agricultural
Pertanian Pertanian Tanaman Agriculture
Penternakan Ternakan
Penternakan dan Akuakultur
Penternakan dan Akuakultur
Commercial
Perniagaan Perniagaan Perniagaan Commercial Area
Perniagaan Terancang
Perniagaan dan Perkhidmatan
Perniagaan dan Perkhidmatan
Perkhidmatan dan Perniagaan
PD
Green/Open Space
Hutan Hutan Hutan/Belukar/Paya
Kawasan Hijau Hutan/Tumbuhan Semulajadi
Tanah Kosong Tanah Kosong
Tanah Kosong Semulajadi
Tanah Lapang Tanah Lapang Tanah Lapang
Tanah Lapang/Bukit
Tanah Lapang dan Rekreasi
Tanah Lapang dan Rekreasi
Sedia Ada Dikekalkan
KL
KRKL
Industrial
Industri Industri Industri Industrial Area
Lombong Perlombongan
Rizab Lombong
ID
Infrastructure
Bekalan Air Infrastruktur
Bekalan Elektrik
Infrastruktur dan Utiliti Infrastruktur dan Utiliti Utiliti Awam Infrastructure and Utilities
Jalan Jalanraya
Pelupusan Sisa Pepejal
Pembetungan
Pengairan dan Perparitan
Pengairan dan Saliran
Pengangkutan Pengangkutan Pengangkutan Traffic and Transportation
Kemudahan Pengangkutan
IU
TR
10 Annexes
Standardized Greater Kuala Lumpur Johor Bahru George Town Kota Kinabalu
Institutional
Institusi Institusi Institusi Kerajaan/ Badan Berkanun
Institusi dan Kemudahan Masyarakat
Institusi dan Kemudahan Masyarakat
Government and Community Facility
Keagamaan Tempat Ibadat
Keselamatan
Kesihatan
Pendidikan Pendidikan
Lain-lain Kemudahan Masyarakat
Kemudahan Awam
INT
KBR Perkuburan
KKA
Perkhidmatan dan Kemudahan
OtherBangunan
Bangunan Kosong
Residential
Kediaman Kediaman Kediaman Residential Area
Perumahan Terancang Taman Perumahan
Rumah Kebajikan
KD
STG
Water Bodies
Badan Air Badan Air Laut/Sungai/Tasik Water Bodies
Badan Air Buatan
SG
2.2 Technical Recommendations on the Management of GIS Data in Malaysia
8. Based on the experience of working with GIS data on land use from five different sources in Malaysia, the World Bank team offers the following technical recommendations for improving the management of GIS data in Malaysia:
» Standardize the land use classifications, ideally using nested classifications that allow for aggregation (see Annex 3-1 for a summary of the non-standardized nature of classifications currently).
» Standardize the map projections used. Currently, different data sources use different map projections.
» Synchronize the data collection schedule across the country, so that data for the same year(s) is available for each city. For example, DBKL has land use data for 2000 and 2010, while JPBD Selangor has data for 2002 and 2008.
Table 2-1 Continued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 11
9. When editing land use files, make sure that the integrity of the typology remains intact. For example, to add water bodies, avoid drawing polygons on top of an existing layer, which results in overlapping polygons that will create area calculations errors later; instead, water bodies need to be integrated into the layer.
2.3 Modelling the impact of Malay Reserve Land on housing affordability in Johor Bahru
10. “Malay Reserve Land,” detailed under the Malay Reservation Enactment or ERM, refers to a special category of land situated within the territorial boundaries of a state, which can be owned and dealt over only by Malays or the natives of the state. Limiting access to Malay Reserve Land undervalues the prices of these properties, and puts unnecessary upward pressure on neighboring land prices. As a result there is a limited market for the trading of Malay Reserve Land. Reports suggest that, when the government acquires such land for development or when Malay developers buy the land, they are reluctant to pay a high price or compensation because of the limited market and the lack of financial resources. These buyers may lose interest in the deal since landowners set high prices. As a result, the land remains undeveloped (Omar, 2002).
11. To understand how the segregation of MRL from the land market could potentially affect housing and land affordability, a theoretical framework that reflects the interplay between households’ localization decisions, project developers’ construction decisions and transport costs is required. The standard urban economics model as defined by Fujita (1989) based on the pioneering works of Alsonso (1964), Mills (1967) and Muth (1969) is well suited to conduct such a study. The aim of this study is precisely to evaluate the impact of excluding Malay reserves from urbanization in relative terms compared to a situation where Malay reserves are entirely available to urbanize.
12. In this exercise we use such a standard model and inform it by using real world inputs from Malaysia and Johor Bahru in particular. First, we calculate how much space MRL occupy, identify their locations within the city, and exclude these areas from potential urbanization. According to the data provided by the local government, approximately 14.5% of the land within the conurbation line is MRL, as shown in the map below.
Figure 2-1: Malay Reserve Land and FELDA land in Johor Bahru conurbation
12 Annexes
13. This model aims to explain the variation in land costs in cities and level of real estate prices together with the distribution of households and buildings in an urban area. Classically, it is based on two very simplified, yet realistic, fundamental mechanisms. First, households, when choosing where to live, trade-off between the proximity to the city centre and the level of real estate prices (or equivalently between the proximity to the city centre and the size of the dwelling they will occupy). Second, the project developers (or landowners) maximise their profits and choose to build more or less housing surface in a given place depending on the level of real estate prices. The higher the real estate prices, the denser the developers choose to build. In this model version, landowners are assumed to live outside the city, which means that land rents are not recycled into the local economy as income.
14. In the present study, we use this model with a certain number of simplifying hypotheses. First, we assume that all households commute every day to the centre of Johor Bahru, where jobs are assumed to be located. Second, the model also relies on the hypothesis that all households within the urban area earn the same average income.
15. With a limited amount of data describing the size of the population, average households’ income, the transport system (in this case in a very simplified manner), land use, construction costs, and households and developers’ behavior, the mechanisms described above can reproduce the main features of an urban area in a schematic way. The main outputs of such a model are: rents expressed in currency/sq meter of housing space, dwelling size in sq meters, housing density or equivalently building heights in number of floors and population density expressed in households/sq km. Other outputs can be computed such as land values expressed in currency/sq meters of land. See charts below that exhibit the main outputs of the model.
Figure 2-2: The urban economics model on the impacts of Malay Reserve Land
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 13
16. In this simplified representation of Johor Bahru and without detailed calibration data, the outputs of the model should be considered with precaution. However, although the actual value of each output variable is unlikely to match real values (because calibration is very basic and real world features such as transport networks are absent), their variation when a shock is introduced in the urban system (such as excluding land from potential urbanization) is meaningful and likely to change only marginally with more spatially detailed information.
17. The table below presents the modelling results on the increase in rents and land values for the scenario when MRL is excluded from urbanization. The first row presents the result when the value of ß (the share of income devoted to housing expenditures) is set as 0.16, which is based on existing data for Johor Bahru. The impacts are increase in rents of 1.30% and increase in total land values of 4.60%. The increase is not huge, but neither is it negligable. This is not only related to the size of the MRL in Johor Bahru, but also the location – some of the MRL areas are located quite close to the city center where the rents are high. The following rows in the table present results of the sensitivity analysis with different values of ß.
Table 2-2: Estimated increase in rents and land values when MRL is excluded from urbanization
Value of ß Variation in rents Variation in total land values
0.16 +1.29% +4.59%
0.10 1.26% 4.48%
0.15 1.30% 4.64%
0.2 1.20% 4.29%
0.25 1.12% 3.97%
0.3 1.08% 3.85%
14 Annexes
3.
INST
ITU
TIO
NAL
ISS
UES
(AN
NEX
ES F
OR
CHAP
TER
4)
3.1
Inst
itut
iona
l Map
ping
Tabl
e 3-
1: In
stit
utio
nal M
ap -
Fede
ral T
erri
tory
of K
uala
Lum
pur
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Zoni
ng &
Lan
d us
eSe
lang
or S
tate
Go
vern
men
t
Jaba
tan
Pera
ncan
gan
Fizi
kal
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Kua
la L
umpu
r (DB
KL)
Min
istr
y of
Fed
eral
Ter
rito
ries
Tow
n An
d Co
untr
y Pl
anni
ng A
ct 1
976
[Act
17
2]
Amen
dmen
ts
Road
Net
wor
k
Priv
ate
Hig
hway
sM
inis
try
of W
orks
Lem
baga
Leb
uhra
ya
Mal
aysi
a Pr
ivat
e Co
nces
sion
aire
Lem
baga
Leb
uhra
ya
Mal
aysi
a Pr
ivat
e Co
nces
sion
aire
Act 2
31 A
kta
Lem
baga
Le
buhr
aya
Mal
aysi
a (P
erba
dana
n) 1
980
Fede
ral H
ighw
ays
/ Ro
ads
Min
istr
y of
Wor
ksJa
bata
n Ke
rja
Raya
(Dep
artm
ent o
f Pub
lic W
orks
) M
inis
try
of W
orks
Fede
ral R
oad
Act 1
959
Mun
icip
al R
oads
Min
istr
y of
Fed
eral
Te
rrito
ries
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Kua
la L
umpu
r (DB
KL)
Min
istr
y of
Fed
eral
Ter
rito
ries
Road
Tra
nspo
rt A
ct 1
987
Stre
et, D
rain
age
and
Build
ing
Act 1
974
(199
4)
Tran
spor
t Net
wor
k
Publ
ic P
arki
ngM
inis
try
of F
eder
al
Terr
itori
es
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Kua
la L
umpu
r (DB
KL)
OR
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Kua
la L
umpu
r (DB
KL)
Min
istr
y of
Fed
eral
Ter
rito
ries
DBKL
By
law
s
Priv
ate
Park
ing
Min
istr
y of
Fed
eral
Te
rrito
ries
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Kua
la L
umpu
r (DB
KL)
OR
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ku
ala
Lum
pur
(DBK
L)
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsDB
KL B
y la
ws
Bus
Net
wor
k &
St
atio
nsSu
ruha
njay
a Pe
ngan
gkut
an A
wam
Dar
at (S
PAD)
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ku
ala
Lum
pur
(DBK
L) M
inis
try
of
Fede
ral T
erri
tori
es
Suru
hanj
aya
Peng
angk
utan
Aw
am D
arat
(S
PAD)
Land
Pub
lic T
rans
port
Ac
t 201
0
Rail
Net
wor
k &
St
atio
nsSu
ruha
njay
a Pe
ngan
gkut
an A
wam
Dar
at
(SPA
D)
Publ
icly
ow
ned
Cor
pora
tion
s
MRT
Cor
p KT
MB
(Ker
etap
i Tan
ah M
elay
u Be
rhad
) M
yRap
id (L
RT &
Mon
orai
l)
Suru
hanj
aya
Peng
angk
utan
Aw
am D
arat
(SPA
D)
Publ
icly
ow
ned
Co
rpor
atio
ns
MRT
Cor
p KT
MB
(Ker
etap
i Ta
nah
Mel
ayu
Berh
ad)
MyR
apid
(LRT
&
Mon
orai
l)
Land
Pub
lic T
rans
port
Ac
t 201
0
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 15
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Taxi
sSu
ruha
njay
a Pe
ngan
gkut
an A
wam
Dar
at (S
PAD)
Land
Pub
lic T
rans
port
Ac
t 201
0
Oth
er L
and
Publ
ic
Tran
spor
tSu
ruha
njay
a Pe
ngan
gkut
an A
wam
Dar
at (S
PAD)
Land
Pub
lic T
rans
port
Ac
t 201
0
Airp
orts
Depa
rtm
ent o
f Civ
il Av
iatio
n
Min
istr
y of
Tra
nspo
rtM
alay
sia
Airp
orts
Hol
ding
s Be
rhad
Depa
rtm
ent o
f Civ
il Av
iatio
n
Min
istr
y of
Tra
nspo
rtCi
vil A
viat
ion
Act 1
969
Cycl
ing
Net
wor
kM
inis
try
of F
eder
al
Terr
itori
esDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya K
uala
Lum
pur (
DBKL
) M
inis
try
of F
eder
al T
erri
tori
esDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya K
uala
Lum
pur (
DBKL
) DB
KL B
y la
ws
Pede
stri
an N
etw
ork
Min
istr
y of
Fed
eral
Te
rrito
ries
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Kua
la L
umpu
r (DB
KL)
Min
istr
y of
Fed
eral
Ter
rito
ries
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Kua
la L
umpu
r (DB
KL)
DBKL
By
law
s
Drai
nage
&
Irri
gatio
n (F
lood
M
itiga
tion)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmet
n of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
OR
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
Sela
ngor
Sta
te
Gov
ernm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Drai
nage
Wor
ks A
ct
1954
(198
8)
Drai
nage
&
Irri
gatio
n (L
ocal
Dr
aina
ge N
etw
ork)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
Mun
icip
al O
R Pr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Kua
la L
umpu
r (DB
KL)
Stre
et, D
rain
age
and
Build
ing
Act 1
974
(199
4)
Loca
l Gov
ernm
ent A
ct
(197
6): (
Peni
nsul
ar)
Tow
n an
d Co
untr
y Pl
anni
ng A
ct 1
976
MBP
J Ea
rthW
orks
By
Law
(M
PSJ)
2007
16 Annexes
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Sew
erag
e
Suru
hanj
aya
Perk
hidm
atan
Ai
r Neg
ara
- SP
AN (N
atio
nal
Wat
er S
ervi
ces
Com
mis
sion
Jaba
tan
Perk
hidm
atan
Pe
mbe
ntun
gan
(Sew
erag
e Se
rvic
es
Depa
rtm
ent)
M
inis
try
of E
nerg
y,
Gre
en T
echn
olog
y &
Wat
er (K
ETTH
A)
Inda
h W
ater
Kon
sort
ium
(IW
K)
Suru
hanj
aya
Perk
hidm
atan
Ai
r Neg
ara
- SP
AN (N
atio
nal
Wat
er S
ervi
ces
Com
mis
sion
)
Inda
h W
ater
Ko
nsor
tium
(IW
K)
Akta
Per
khid
mat
an
Pem
betu
ngan
199
3 (A
ct
508)
A
ct 6
54 S
uruh
anja
ya
Perk
hidm
atan
Air
N
egar
a Ac
t 200
6
Solid
Was
te
(Col
lect
ion)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
en
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
Neg
ara
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id
Was
te M
anag
emen
t De
part
men
t)
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
& L
ocal
G
over
nmen
t
Perb
adan
an P
engu
rusa
n Si
sa P
epej
al d
an
Pem
bers
ihan
Aw
am (P
PSPP
A)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an W
ellb
eing
, Hou
sing
&
Loca
l Gov
ernm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
Neg
ara
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id
Was
te M
anag
emen
t De
part
men
t)
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
& L
ocal
G
over
nmen
t
Perb
adan
an
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
dan
Pe
mbe
rsih
an A
wam
(P
PSPP
A)
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
& L
ocal
G
over
nmen
t
Akta
Per
bada
nan
Peng
urus
an S
isa
Pepe
jal
dan
Pem
bers
ihan
Aw
am
(Akt
a 67
3)
Solid
Was
te
(Dis
posa
l - P
ublic
)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an S
isa
Pepe
jal N
egar
a
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id W
aste
Man
agem
ent
Depa
rtm
ent)
M
inis
try
of U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng &
Lo
cal G
over
nmen
t
Dew
an B
anda
r Ku
ala
Lum
pur (
DB
KL)
Min
istr
y of
Fed
eral
Te
rrit
ory
Jaba
tan
Alam
Se
kita
r (D
epar
tmen
t of
Envi
ronm
ent)
M
inis
try
of N
atur
al
Reso
urce
s an
d En
viro
nmen
t
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
Neg
ara
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id
Was
te M
anag
emen
t De
part
men
t)
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
& L
ocal
G
over
nmen
t
Act 6
72 S
olid
Was
te
and
Publ
ic C
lean
sing
M
anag
emen
t Act
200
7
(effl
uent
)
Solid
Was
te
(Dis
posa
l - P
riva
te)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
Neg
ara
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id
Was
te M
anag
emen
t De
part
men
t)
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
& L
ocal
G
over
nmen
t
Priv
ate
Conc
essi
onai
re
Jaba
tan
Alam
Se
kita
r (D
epar
tmen
t of
Envi
ronm
ent)
M
inis
try
of N
atur
al
Reso
urce
s an
d En
viro
nmen
t
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
Neg
ara
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id
Was
te M
anag
emen
t De
part
men
t)
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
& L
ocal
G
over
nmen
t
Act 6
72 S
olid
Was
te
and
Publ
ic C
lean
sing
M
anag
emen
t Act
200
7 Lo
cal G
over
nmen
t (A
men
dmen
t) A
ct 2
007
Tabl
e 3-
1 Co
ntin
ued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 17
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Wat
er
Suru
hanj
aya
Perk
hidm
atan
Ai
r Neg
ara
- SP
AN (N
atio
nal
Wat
er S
ervi
ces
Com
mis
sion
)
Jaba
tan
Beka
lan
Air
(Sew
erag
e Se
rvic
es
Depa
rtm
ent)
M
inis
try
of E
nerg
y,
Gre
en T
echn
olog
y &
Wat
er (K
ETTH
A)
Syar
ikat
Bek
alan
Air
Sel
ango
r (SY
ABAS
)
Suru
hanj
aya
Perk
hidm
atan
Ai
r Neg
ara
- SP
AN (N
atio
nal
Wat
er S
ervi
ces
Com
mis
sion
)
Sya
rika
t Bek
alan
Ai
r Sel
ango
r Bhd
(S
yaba
s), P
unca
k N
iaga
Sdn
Bhd
(P
NSB
), Ko
nsor
tium
Ab
bas
Sdn
Bhd
(Abb
as) a
nd
Syar
ikat
Pen
gelu
ar
Air S
elan
gor
Hol
ding
s Bh
d (S
plas
h).
Act 6
54 S
uruh
anja
ya
Perk
hidm
atan
Air
N
egar
a Ac
t 200
6 Ac
t 655
Wat
er S
ervi
ce
Indu
stry
Act
200
6
Elec
tric
ity N
etw
ork
(Dis
trib
utio
n)Su
ruha
njay
a Te
naga
Tena
ga N
asio
nal
Berh
ad
Tena
ga N
asio
nal
Berh
ad O
R Pr
ivat
e De
velo
per
Tena
ga N
asio
nal
Berh
adSu
ruha
njay
a Te
naga
Tena
ga N
asio
nal
Berh
ad
Act 6
10 E
nerg
y Co
mm
issi
on A
ct 2
001
Act 4
47 E
lect
rici
ty
Supp
ly A
ct 1
990
Tele
com
mun
icat
ions
N
etw
ork
Mal
aysi
a Co
mm
unic
atio
ns a
nd M
ultim
edia
Co
mm
issi
onPr
ivat
e Te
leco
mm
unic
atio
ns C
ompa
nies
Mal
aysi
a Co
mm
unic
atio
ns a
nd M
ultim
edia
Co
mm
issi
on
Com
mun
icat
ions
and
M
ultim
edia
Act
199
8 Co
mm
unic
atio
ns a
nd
Mul
timed
ia C
omm
issi
on
Act (
1998
)
Gas
Supp
lySu
ruha
njay
a Te
naga
Gas
Mal
aysi
a Be
rhad
( M
MC
Com
pany
)Su
ruha
njay
a Te
naga
Gas
Mal
aysi
a Be
rhad
( M
MC
Com
pany
)GA
S SU
PPLY
ACT
199
3
Publ
ic B
uild
ings
and
Cor
e U
rban
Ser
vice
s
18 Annexes
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Publ
ic M
arke
ts &
H
awke
rsDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya K
uala
Lum
pur (
DBKL
) M
inis
try
of F
eder
al T
erri
tori
es
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ku
ala
Lum
pur
(DBK
L) M
inis
try
of
Fede
ral T
erri
tori
es
AND/
OR
Jaba
tan
Alam
Sek
itar
(Dep
artm
ent o
f En
viro
nmen
t)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
and
Envi
ronm
ent
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ku
ala
Lum
pur
(DBK
L) M
inis
try
of
Fede
ral T
erri
tori
es
Ope
n Sp
aces
&
Publ
ic P
arks
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Kua
la L
umpu
r (DB
KL)
Min
istr
y of
Fed
eral
Ter
rito
ries
Polic
e St
atio
ns
Min
istr
y of
Hom
e Aff
airs
AN
D/O
R
Jaba
tan
Pera
ncan
g Ba
ndar
dan
Des
a
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gov
ernm
ent
Polis
Dir
aja
Mal
aysi
a
(Pol
ice
Depa
rtm
ent)
M
inis
try
of H
ome
Affai
rsM
inis
try
of H
ome
Affai
rs
Fire
Sta
tions
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent
Fire
Dep
artm
ent (
BOM
BA)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an W
ellb
eing
, Hou
sing
and
Loc
al G
over
nmen
tFi
re S
ervi
ces
Act 1
988
(Act
341
)
Hos
pita
ls a
nd
Med
ical
Car
e
Min
istr
y of
Hea
lth
AND/
OR
Ja
bata
n Pe
ranc
ang
Band
ar d
an D
esa
M
inis
try
of
Urb
an W
ellb
eing
, H
ousi
ng a
nd L
ocal
G
over
nmen
t
Baha
gian
Pem
bang
unan
M
inis
try
of H
ealt
h O
R Pr
ivat
e H
ospi
tal
Min
istr
y of
Hea
lth
Scho
ols
Min
istr
y of
Edu
catio
n
Inst
itute
of H
ighe
r Le
arni
ngM
inis
try
of H
ighe
r Edu
catio
n
Tabl
e 3-
1 Co
ntin
ued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 19
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Libr
arie
sM
inis
try
of In
form
atio
n, C
omm
unic
atio
n an
d Cu
lture
Art &
Cul
tura
l Ce
nter
sM
inis
try
of In
form
atio
n, C
omm
unic
atio
n an
d Cu
lture
Hot
els
Min
istr
y of
Tou
rism
&
Cul
ture
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsM
inis
try
of T
ouri
sm &
Cul
ture
Innk
eepe
rs A
ct 1
952
Hot
els
(Fed
eral
Ter
rito
ry
Of K
uala
Lum
pur)
Act
20
03
Hom
es, N
urse
ries
&
Kind
erga
rden
s
Min
istr
y of
W
omen
, Fam
ily
& C
omm
unit
y D
evel
opm
ent
Wel
fare
Dep
artm
ent
Min
istr
y of
W
omen
, Fam
ily
& C
omm
unit
y D
evel
opm
ent
Priv
ate
Busi
ness
Ow
ner
Wel
fare
Dep
artm
ent
Min
istr
y of
W
omen
, Fam
ily
& C
omm
unit
y D
evel
opm
ent
Min
istr
y of
W
omen
, Fam
ily
& C
omm
unit
y D
evel
opm
ent
Act 3
08 C
hild
Car
e Ce
ntre
Act
19
84
Com
mun
ity
Cent
ers
(Inc
ludi
ng
Spor
ts F
acili
ties,
M
ultip
urpo
se H
alls
, et
c)
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Kua
la L
umpu
r (DB
KL)
Min
istr
y of
Fed
eral
Ter
rito
ries
Publ
ic H
ousi
ng-P
PR
(Fun
ded
Fede
ral)
Jaba
tan
Peru
mah
an N
egar
aDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya K
uala
Lum
pur
(DBK
L) M
inis
try
of F
eder
al T
erri
tori
es
PR1M
A (P
riva
te)
Jaba
tan
Peru
mah
an
Neg
ara
PR1M
AJM
BPR
1MA
Publ
ic S
erva
nt
Hou
sing
(PPA
1M)
Jaba
tan
Peru
mah
an N
egar
aJM
B
Rum
ah W
ilaya
h Pe
rsek
utua
n (F
eder
al H
ousi
ng)
Min
istr
y of
Fed
eral
Te
rrito
ries
Jaba
tan
Peru
mah
an N
egar
aJM
B
Adve
rtis
emen
ts
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ku
ala
Lum
pur
(DBK
L) M
inis
try
of
Fede
ral T
erri
tori
es
Priv
ate
Com
pani
es
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ku
ala
Lum
pur
(DBK
L) M
inis
try
of
Fede
ral T
erri
tori
es
Priv
ate
Com
pani
es
Traffi
c M
anag
emen
t/
Cong
estio
n Co
ntro
l an
d M
onito
ring
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ku
ala
Lum
pur
(DBK
L) M
inis
try
of
Fede
ral T
erri
tori
es
AND
/OR
Polic
e Di
raja
Mal
aysi
a (P
DRM
) Min
istr
y of
H
ome
Affai
rs
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Kua
la L
umpu
r (DB
KL)
Min
istr
y of
Fed
eral
Ter
rito
ries
20 Annexes
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Land
Val
uatio
ns
(DBK
L La
nd)
Prop
erty
Man
agem
ent &
Lan
d Va
luat
ion
Depa
rtm
ent (
DBKL
)Se
ctio
n 14
4, L
ocal
Go
vern
men
t Act
1976
Land
Val
uatio
ns
(Fed
eral
Lan
d)Va
luat
ion
and
Prop
erty
Ser
vice
s De
part
men
t, M
inis
try
of F
inan
ce
Build
ing
Cont
rol
Com
mer
cial
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND
De
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kual
a Lu
mpu
r (D
BKL)
Min
istr
y of
Fe
dera
l Ter
rito
ries
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsPr
ivat
e O
wne
rs/
JMB
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND
De
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kual
a Lu
mpu
r (D
BKL)
Min
istr
y of
Fe
dera
l Ter
rito
ries
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ku
ala
Lum
pur
(DBK
L) M
inis
try
of
Fede
ral T
erri
tori
es
Stre
et, D
rain
age
And
Build
ing
Act 1
974
U
nifo
rm B
uild
ing
By
Law
s Bu
ildin
g An
d Co
mm
on
Prop
erty
(Mai
nten
ance
An
d M
anag
emen
t) A
ct
2007
[Act
663
]
Resi
dent
ial
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND
De
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kual
a Lu
mpu
r (D
BKL)
Min
istr
y of
Fe
dera
l Ter
rito
ries
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsPr
ivat
e O
wne
rs/
JMB
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND
De
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kual
a Lu
mpu
r (D
BKL)
Min
istr
y of
Fe
dera
l Ter
rito
ries
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ku
ala
Lum
pur
(DBK
L) M
inis
try
of
Fede
ral T
erri
tori
es
Stre
et, D
rain
age
And
Build
ing
Act 1
974
U
nifo
rm B
uild
ing
By
Law
s Bu
ildin
g An
d Co
mm
on
Prop
erty
(Mai
nten
ance
An
d M
anag
emen
t) A
ct
2007
[Act
663
]
Publ
ic B
uild
ings
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND
De
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kual
a Lu
mpu
r (D
BKL)
Min
istr
y of
Fe
dera
l Ter
rito
ries
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
trie
s
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND
De
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kual
a Lu
mpu
r (D
BKL)
Min
istr
y of
Fe
dera
l Ter
rito
ries
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ku
ala
Lum
pur
(DBK
L) M
inis
try
of
Fede
ral T
erri
tori
es
Stre
et, D
rain
age
And
Build
ing
Act 1
974
U
nifo
rm B
uild
ing
By
Law
s
Her
itage
Bui
ldin
gs
Her
itage
Co
mm
issi
on
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R De
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kual
a Lu
mpu
r (D
BKL)
Min
istr
y of
Fe
dera
l Ter
rito
ries
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs/
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
try
Her
itage
Com
mis
sion
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R De
wan
Ban
dara
ya K
uala
Lum
pur (
DBKL
) M
inis
try
of F
eder
al T
erri
tori
es
Nat
iona
l Her
itage
Act
20
05
Tabl
e 3-
1 Co
ntin
ued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 21
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
No
Fly
Zone
s (B
uild
ing
Hei
ghts
)
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
(Dep
artm
ent o
f Av
iati
on) A
ND
De
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kual
a Lu
mpu
r (D
BKL)
Min
istr
y of
Fe
dera
l Ter
rito
ries
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
(Dep
artm
ent o
f Av
iati
on)
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs
Min
istr
y of
Tra
nspo
rt (D
epar
tmen
t of
Avia
tion)
AN
D De
wan
Ban
dara
ya K
uala
Lu
mpu
r (DB
KL)
Min
istr
y of
Fed
eral
Ter
rito
ries
Spec
ial R
eser
ves
/ Zo
nes
Cont
rol
Spec
ial E
cono
mic
Zo
ne (E
.G T
RX
Exch
ange
)M
inis
try
of F
inan
ce
Mul
timed
ia S
uper
Co
rrid
or Z
ones
Min
istr
y of
Fin
ance
AN
D
Mul
timed
ia D
evel
opm
ent C
orpo
ratio
n
Her
itage
Zon
es
Her
itage
Co
mm
issi
on
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R De
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kual
a Lu
mpu
r (D
BKL)
Min
istr
y of
Fe
dera
l Ter
rito
ries
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs/
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
try
Her
itage
Com
mis
sion
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R De
wan
Ban
dara
ya K
uala
Lum
pur (
DBKL
) M
inis
try
of F
eder
al T
erri
tori
es
Nat
iona
l Her
itage
Act
20
05
Rive
r Res
erve
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmet
n of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dra
inag
e)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Res
ourc
es &
En
viro
nmen
t
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmet
n of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
O
R Pr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmet
n of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
O
R De
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kual
a Lu
mpu
r (D
BKL)
Min
istr
y of
Fe
dera
l Ter
rito
ries
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmet
n of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dra
inag
e)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Res
ourc
es &
En
viro
nmen
t
Wat
ers
Act 1
920
(Act
41
8)
Fore
st R
eser
veFo
rest
ry D
epar
tmen
t M
inis
try
of N
atur
al R
esou
rces
& E
nvir
onm
ent
Nat
iona
l For
estr
y Ac
t 19
84 (A
men
dmen
t 19
93)
Rest
rict
ed Z
ones
M
inis
try
of H
ome
Affai
rsPr
otec
ted
Area
s An
d Pr
otec
ted
Plac
es A
ct 1
959
22 Annexes
Tabl
e 3-
2: In
stit
utio
nal M
ap: F
eder
al T
erri
tory
of P
utra
jaya
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Zoni
ng &
Lan
d us
eSe
lang
or S
tate
Go
vern
men
tJa
bata
n Pe
ranc
anga
n Fi
zika
l Per
bada
nan
Putr
ajay
a M
inis
try
of F
eder
al T
erri
tori
es
Tow
n An
d Co
untr
y Pl
anni
ng A
ct 1
976
[Act
17
2]
Amen
dmen
ts
Road
Net
wor
k
Priv
ate
Hig
hway
sM
inis
try
of W
orks
Lem
baga
Leb
uhra
ya
Mal
aysi
a Pr
ivat
e Co
nces
sion
aire
Lem
baga
Leb
uhra
ya
Mal
aysi
a Pr
ivat
e Co
nces
sion
aire
Act 2
31 H
ighw
ay
Auth
ority
Mal
aysi
a (I
ncor
pora
tion)
Act
198
0
Fede
ral H
ighw
ays
/ Ro
ads
Min
istr
y of
Wor
ksJa
bata
n Ke
rja
Raya
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Publ
ic W
orks
)
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya (D
epar
tmen
t of P
ublic
Wor
ks)
Min
istr
y of
Wor
ksFe
dera
l Roa
d Ac
t 195
9
Mun
icip
al R
oads
Min
istr
y of
Fed
eral
Te
rrito
ries
Perb
adan
an P
utra
jaya
M
inis
try
of F
eder
al T
erri
tori
es
Road
Tra
nspo
rt A
ct 1
987
Stre
et, D
rain
age
and
Build
ing
Act 1
974
(199
4)
Tran
spor
t Net
wor
k
Publ
ic P
arki
ngM
inis
try
of F
eder
al
Terr
itori
esPe
rbad
anan
Put
raja
ya O
R Pr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Perb
adan
an
Putr
ajay
a M
inis
try
of F
eder
al
Terr
itori
es
Perb
adan
an P
utra
jaya
Priv
ate
Park
ing
Min
istr
y of
Fed
eral
Te
rrito
ries
Perb
adan
an
Putr
ajay
a O
R Pr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Perb
adan
an
Putr
ajay
a O
R Pr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsPe
rbad
anan
Pu
traj
aya
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs
Lice
nsin
g of
Pri
vate
Ca
rpar
ks (F
eder
al
Terr
itory
of P
utra
jaya
) By
- Law
s 20
02
Bus
Net
wor
k &
St
atio
nsSu
ruha
njay
a Pe
ngan
gkut
an A
wam
Dar
at (S
PAD)
Perb
adan
an
Putr
ajay
a M
inis
try
of F
eder
al
Terr
itori
es
Suru
hanj
aya
Peng
angk
utan
Aw
am D
arat
(S
PAD)
Land
Pub
lic T
rans
port
Ac
t 201
0
Rail
Net
wor
k &
St
atio
nsSu
ruha
njay
a Pe
ngan
gkut
an A
wam
Dar
at
(SPA
D)
Publ
icly
ow
ned
Co
rpor
atio
ns
MRT
Cor
p KT
MB
(Ker
etap
i Ta
nah
Mel
ayu
Berh
ad)
MyR
apid
(LRT
&
Mon
orai
l)
Publ
icly
ow
ned
Co
rpor
atio
ns
MRT
Cor
p KT
MB
(Ker
etap
i Ta
nah
Mel
ayu
Berh
ad)
MyR
apid
(LRT
&
Mon
orai
l)
Suru
hanj
aya
Peng
angk
utan
Aw
am D
arat
(SPA
D)
Publ
icly
ow
ned
Co
rpor
atio
ns
MRT
Cor
p KT
MB
(Ker
etap
i Ta
nah
Mel
ayu
Berh
ad)
MyR
apid
(LRT
&
Mon
orai
l)
Land
Pub
lic T
rans
port
Ac
t 201
0
Taxi
sSu
ruha
njay
a Pe
ngan
gkut
an A
wam
Dar
at (S
PAD)
Land
Pub
lic T
rans
port
Ac
t 201
0
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 23
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Oth
er L
and
Publ
ic
Tran
spor
tSu
ruha
njay
a Pe
ngan
gkut
an A
wam
Dar
at (S
PAD)
Land
Pub
lic T
rans
port
Ac
t 201
0
Airp
orts
Depa
rtm
ent o
f Civ
il Av
iatio
n
Min
istr
y of
Tra
nspo
rtM
alay
sia
Airp
orts
Hol
ding
s Be
rhad
Depa
rtm
ent O
f Civ
il Av
iatio
n
Min
istr
y O
f Tra
nspo
rtCi
vil A
viat
ion
Act 1
969
Cycl
ing
Net
wor
kM
inis
try
of F
eder
al
Terr
itori
esPe
rbad
anan
Put
raja
ya
Min
istr
y of
Fed
eral
Ter
rito
ries
Perb
adan
an P
utra
jaya
Pede
stri
an N
etw
ork
Min
istr
y of
Fed
eral
Te
rrito
ries
Perb
adan
an P
utra
jaya
M
inis
try
of F
eder
al T
erri
tori
esPe
rbad
anan
Put
raja
ya
Drai
nage
&
Irri
gatio
n (F
lood
M
itiga
tion)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of I
rrig
atio
n &
Dra
inag
e)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Res
ourc
es &
En
viro
nmen
t
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
OR
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
Sela
ngor
Sta
te
Gov
ernm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of I
rrig
atio
n &
Dra
inag
e)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Res
ourc
es &
En
viro
nmen
t
Drai
nage
Wor
ks A
ct 1
954
(198
8)
Drai
nage
&
Irri
gatio
n (L
ocal
Dr
aina
ge N
etw
ork)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
Mun
icip
al O
R Pr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Perb
adan
an P
utra
jaya
Stre
et, D
rain
age
and
Build
ing
Act 1
974
(199
4)
Loca
l Gov
ernm
ent A
ct
(197
6): (
Peni
nsul
ar)
Tow
n an
d Co
untr
y Pl
anni
ng A
ct 1
976
Sew
erag
e
Suru
hanj
aya
Perk
hidm
atan
Ai
r Neg
ara
- SP
AN (N
atio
nal
Wat
er S
ervi
ces
Com
mis
sion
Jaba
tan
Perk
hidm
atan
Pe
mbe
ntun
gan
(Sew
erag
e Se
rvic
es
Depa
rtm
ent)
M
inis
try
of E
nerg
y,
Gre
en T
echn
olog
y &
Wat
er (K
ETTH
A)
Inda
h W
ater
Kon
sort
ium
(IW
K)
Suru
hanj
aya
Perk
hidm
atan
Ai
r Neg
ara
- SP
AN (N
atio
nal
Wat
er S
ervi
ces
Com
mis
sion
)
Inda
h W
ater
Ko
nsor
tium
(IW
K)
Sew
erag
e Se
rvic
es A
ct
1993
(Act
508
) Ac
t 654
Sur
uhan
jaya
Pe
rkhi
dmat
an A
ir N
egar
a Ac
t 200
6
24 Annexes
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Solid
Was
te
(Col
lect
ion)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
Neg
ara
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id
Was
te M
anag
emen
t De
part
men
t)
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
& L
ocal
G
over
nmen
t
Perb
adan
an P
engu
rusa
n Si
sa P
epej
al d
an
Pem
bers
ihan
Aw
am (P
PSPP
A)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an W
ellb
eing
, Hou
sing
&
Loca
l Gov
ernm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
Neg
ara
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id
Was
te M
anag
emen
t De
part
men
t)
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
& L
ocal
G
over
nmen
t
Perb
adan
an
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
dan
Pe
mbe
rsih
an A
wam
(P
PSPP
A)
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
& L
ocal
G
over
nmen
t
Solid
Was
te A
nd P
ublic
Cl
eans
ing
Man
agem
ent C
orpo
ratio
n Ac
t 200
7 (A
ct 6
73)
Solid
Was
te
(Dis
posa
l - P
ublic
)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an S
isa
Pepe
jal N
egar
a
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id W
aste
Man
agem
ent
Depa
rtm
ent)
M
inis
try
of U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng &
Lo
cal G
over
nmen
t
Perb
adan
an
Putr
ajay
a M
inis
try
of F
eder
al
Terr
itor
y
Jaba
tan
Alam
Se
kita
r (D
epar
tmen
t of
Envi
ronm
ent)
M
inis
try
of N
atur
al
Reso
urce
s an
d En
viro
nmen
t
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
Neg
ara
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id
Was
te M
anag
emen
t De
part
men
t)
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
& L
ocal
G
over
nmen
t
Act 6
72 S
olid
Was
te
and
Publ
ic C
lean
sing
M
anag
emen
t Act
200
7
(effl
uent
)
Solid
Was
te
(Dis
posa
l - P
riva
te)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
Neg
ara
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id
Was
te M
anag
emen
t De
part
men
t)
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
& L
ocal
G
over
nmen
t
Priv
ate
Conc
essi
onai
re
Jaba
tan
Alam
Se
kita
r (D
epar
tmen
t of
Envi
ronm
ent)
M
inis
try
of N
atur
al
Reso
urce
s an
d En
viro
nmen
t
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
Neg
ara
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id
Was
te M
anag
emen
t De
part
men
t)
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
& L
ocal
G
over
nmen
t
Act 6
72 S
olid
Was
te
and
Publ
ic C
lean
sing
M
anag
emen
t Act
200
7 L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
(Am
endm
ent)
Act
200
7
Wat
er
Suru
hanj
aya
Perk
hidm
atan
Ai
r Neg
ara
- SP
AN (N
atio
nal
Wat
er S
ervi
ces
Com
mis
sion
)
Jaba
tan
Beka
lan
Air
(Sew
erag
e Se
rvic
es
Depa
rtm
ent)
M
inis
try
of E
nerg
y,
Gre
en T
echn
olog
y &
Wat
er (K
ETTH
A)
Syar
ikat
Bek
alan
Air
Sel
ango
r (SY
ABAS
)
Suru
hanj
aya
Perk
hidm
atan
Ai
r Neg
ara
- SP
AN (N
atio
nal
Wat
er S
ervi
ces
Com
mis
sion
)
Sya
rika
t Bek
alan
Ai
r Sel
ango
r Bhd
(S
yaba
s), P
unca
k N
iaga
Sdn
Bhd
(P
NSB
), Ko
nsor
tium
Ab
bas
Sdn
Bhd
(Abb
as) a
nd
Syar
ikat
Pen
gelu
ar
Air S
elan
gor
Hol
ding
s Bh
d (S
plas
h).
Act 6
54 –
Sur
uhan
jaya
Pe
rkhi
dmat
an A
ir N
egar
a Ac
t 200
6 Ac
t 655
Wat
er S
ervi
ce
Indu
stry
ACT
200
6
Tabl
e 3-
2 Co
ntin
ued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 25
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Elec
tric
ity N
etw
ork
(Dis
trib
utio
n)Su
ruha
njay
a Te
naga
Tena
ga N
asio
nal
Berh
ad
Tena
ga N
asio
nal
Berh
ad O
R Pr
ivat
e De
velo
per
Tena
ga N
asio
nal
Berh
adSu
ruha
njay
a Te
naga
Tena
ga N
asio
nal
Berh
ad
Act 6
10 E
nerg
y Co
mm
issi
on A
ct 2
001
Act 4
47 E
lect
rici
ty
Supp
ly A
ct 1
990
Tele
com
mun
ica-
tions
Net
wor
k M
alay
sia
Com
mun
icat
ions
and
Mul
timed
ia
Com
mis
sion
Priv
ate
Tele
com
mun
icat
ions
Com
pani
esM
alay
sia
Com
mun
icat
ions
and
Mul
timed
ia
Com
mis
sion
Com
mun
icat
ions
and
M
ultim
edia
Act
199
8 Co
mm
unic
atio
ns a
nd
Mul
timed
ia C
omm
issi
on
Act (
1998
)
Gas
Supp
lySu
ruha
njay
a Te
naga
Gas
Mal
aysi
a Be
rhad
( M
MC
Com
pany
)Su
ruha
njay
a Te
naga
Gas
Mal
aysi
a Be
rhad
( M
MC
Com
pany
)Ga
s Su
pply
Act
199
3
Publ
ic B
uild
ings
and
Cor
e U
rban
Ser
vice
s
Publ
ic M
arke
ts &
H
awke
rsPe
rbad
anan
Put
raja
ya
Min
istr
y of
Fed
eral
Ter
rito
ries
Perb
adan
an
Putr
ajay
a M
inis
try
of F
eder
al
Terr
itori
es A
ND/
OR
Jaba
tan
Alam
Se
kita
r (D
epar
tmen
t of
Envi
ronm
ent)
M
inis
try
of N
atur
al
Reso
urce
s an
d En
viro
nmen
t
Perb
adan
an
Putr
ajay
a M
inis
try
of F
eder
al
Terr
itori
es
Mar
ket (
Fede
ral T
erri
tory
of
Put
raja
ya) B
y- L
aws
2003
Ope
n Sp
aces
&
Publ
ic P
arks
Perb
adan
an P
utra
jaya
Min
istr
y of
Fed
eral
Ter
rito
ries
Polic
e St
atio
ns
Min
istr
y of
Hom
e Aff
airs
AN
D/O
R
Jaba
tan
Pera
ncan
g Ba
ndar
dan
Des
a
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gov
ernm
ent
Polis
Dir
aja
Mal
aysi
a
(Pol
ice
Depa
rtm
ent)
Min
istr
y of
Hom
e Aff
airs
Min
istr
y of
Hom
e Aff
airs
Fire
Sta
tions
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent
Fire
Dep
artm
ent (
BOM
BA)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an W
ellb
eing
, Hou
sing
and
Loc
al G
over
nmen
tFi
re S
ervi
ces
Act 1
988
(Act
341
)
26 Annexes
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Hos
pita
ls a
nd
Med
ical
Car
e
Min
istr
y of
Hea
lth
AND/
OR
Ja
bata
n Pe
ranc
ang
Band
ar d
an D
esa
M
inis
try
of
Urb
an W
ellb
eing
, H
ousi
ng a
nd L
ocal
G
over
nmen
t
Baha
gian
Pem
bang
unan
M
inis
try
of H
ealt
h O
R Pr
ivat
e H
ospi
tal
Min
istr
y of
Hea
lth
OR
Priv
ate
Hos
pita
lM
inis
try
of H
ealth
Scho
ols
Min
istr
y of
Edu
catio
n
Inst
itute
of H
ighe
r Le
arni
ngM
inis
try
of H
ighe
r Edu
catio
n
Libr
arie
sM
inis
try
of In
form
atio
n, C
omm
unic
atio
n an
d Cu
lture
Art &
Cul
tura
l Ce
nter
sM
inis
try
of In
form
atio
n, C
omm
unic
atio
n an
d Cu
lture
Hot
els
Min
istr
y of
Tou
rism
&
Cul
ture
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsM
inis
try
of T
ouri
sm &
Cul
ture
Innk
eepe
rs A
ct 1
952
Hom
es, N
urse
ries
&
Kind
erga
rden
s
Min
istr
y of
W
omen
, Fam
ily
& C
omm
unit
y D
evel
opm
ent
Wel
fare
Dep
artm
ent
Min
istr
y of
W
omen
, Fam
ily
& C
omm
unit
y D
evel
opm
ent
Priv
ate
Busi
ness
Ow
ner
Wel
fare
Dep
artm
ent
Min
istr
y of
W
omen
, Fam
ily
& C
omm
unit
y D
evel
opm
ent
Min
istr
y of
W
omen
, Fam
ily
& C
omm
unit
y D
evel
opm
ent
Act 3
08 C
hild
Car
e Ce
ntre
Act
198
4
Com
mun
ity
Cent
ers
(Inc
ludi
ng
Spor
ts F
acili
ties,
M
ultip
urpo
se H
alls
, et
c)
Perb
adan
an P
utra
jaya
M
inis
try
of F
eder
al T
erri
tori
es
Publ
ic H
ousi
ng-P
PR
(Fun
ded
Fede
ral)
Jaba
tan
Peru
mah
an N
egar
aPe
rbad
anan
Put
raja
ya
Min
istr
y of
Fed
eral
Ter
rito
ries
PR1M
A (P
riva
te)
Jaba
tan
Peru
mah
an
Neg
ara
PR1M
AJM
BPR
1MA
Publ
ic S
erva
nt
Hou
sing
(PPA
1M)
Jaba
tan
Peru
mah
an N
egar
aJM
B
Rum
ah W
ilaya
h Pe
rsek
utua
n (F
eder
al H
ousi
ng)
Min
istr
y of
Fed
eral
Te
rrito
ries
Jaba
tan
Peru
mah
an N
egar
aJM
B
Adve
rtis
emen
ts
Perb
adan
an
Putr
ajay
a M
inis
try
of F
eder
al
Terr
itori
es
Priv
ate
Com
pani
es
Perb
adan
an
Putr
ajay
a M
inis
try
of F
eder
al
Terr
itori
es
Priv
ate
Com
pani
esAd
vert
isem
ent(
Fede
ral
Terr
itory
of P
utra
jaya
) By
- Law
s 20
02
Tabl
e 3-
2 Co
ntin
ued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 27
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Traffi
c M
anag
emen
t/
Cong
estio
n Co
ntro
l an
d M
onito
ring
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ku
ala
Lum
pur
(DBK
L) M
inis
try
of
Fede
ral T
erri
tori
es
AND
/OR
Polic
e Di
raja
Mal
aysi
a (P
DRM
) Min
istr
y of
H
ome
Affai
rs
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Kua
la L
umpu
r (DB
KL) M
inis
try
of F
eder
al T
erri
tori
es
Land
Val
uatio
ns
(Put
raja
ya
Hol
ding
s)Pr
oper
ty M
anag
emen
t & L
and
Valu
atio
n De
part
men
t (DB
KL)
Land
Val
uatio
ns
(Fed
eral
Lan
d) V
alua
tion
and
Prop
erty
Ser
vice
s De
part
men
t. M
inis
try
of F
inan
ce
Build
ing
Cont
rol
Com
mer
cial
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Lo
cal G
over
nmen
t AN
D Pe
rbad
anan
Pu
traj
aya
Min
istr
y of
Fed
eral
Te
rrito
ries
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsPr
ivat
e O
wne
rs/
JMB
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Lo
cal G
over
nmen
t AN
D Pe
rbad
anan
Pu
traj
aya
Min
istr
y of
Fed
eral
Te
rrito
ries
Perb
adan
an
Putr
ajay
a M
inis
try
of F
eder
al
Terr
itori
es
1. S
tree
t, Dr
aina
ge A
nd
Build
ing
Act 1
974
2.
Uni
form
Bui
ldin
g By
La
ws
Sela
ngor
3.
Bui
ldin
g An
d Co
mm
on
Prop
erty
(Mai
nten
ance
An
d M
anag
emen
t) A
ct
2007
[Act
663
]
Resi
dent
ial
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Lo
cal G
over
nmen
t AN
D Pe
rbad
anan
Pu
traj
aya
Min
istr
y of
Fed
eral
Te
rrito
ries
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsPr
ivat
e O
wne
rs/
JMB
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Lo
cal G
over
nmen
t AN
D Pe
rbad
anan
Pu
traj
aya
Min
istr
y of
Fed
eral
Te
rrito
ries
Perb
adan
an
Putr
ajay
a M
inis
try
of F
eder
al
Terr
itori
es
1. S
tree
t, Dr
aina
ge A
nd
Build
ing
Act 1
974
2.
Uni
form
Bui
ldin
g By
La
ws
Sela
ngor
3.
Hou
sing
Dev
elop
men
t (C
ontr
ol A
nd L
icen
sing
) 19
66 [A
ct 1
18]
4. B
uild
ing
And
Com
mon
Pr
oper
ty (M
aint
enan
ce
And
Man
agem
ent)
Act
20
07 [A
ct 6
63]
28 Annexes
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Publ
ic B
uild
ings
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Lo
cal G
over
nmen
t AN
D Pe
rbad
anan
Pu
traj
aya
Min
istr
y of
Fed
eral
Te
rrito
ries
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
trie
s
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Lo
cal G
over
nmen
t AN
D Pe
rbad
anan
Pu
traj
aya
Min
istr
y of
Fed
eral
Te
rrito
ries
Perb
adan
an
Putr
ajay
a M
inis
try
of F
eder
al
Terr
itori
es
1. S
tree
t, Dr
aina
ge A
nd
Build
ing
Act 1
974
2.
Uni
form
Bui
ldin
g By
La
ws
Sela
ngor
Her
itage
Bui
ldin
gs
Her
itage
Co
mm
issi
on
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R Pe
rbad
anan
Pu
traj
aya
Min
istr
y of
Fed
eral
Te
rrito
ries
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs/
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
try
Her
itage
Com
mis
sion
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R Pe
rbad
anan
Put
raja
ya M
inis
try
of F
eder
al
Terr
itori
es
Nat
iona
l Her
itage
Act
20
05
No
Fly
Zone
s (B
uild
ing
Hei
ghts
)
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
(Dep
artm
ent o
f Av
iati
on) A
ND
Pe
rbad
anan
Pu
traj
aya
Min
istr
y of
Fed
eral
Te
rrit
orie
s
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
(Dep
artm
ent o
f Av
iati
on)
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsM
inis
try
of T
rans
port
(Dep
artm
ent o
f Av
iatio
n) A
ND
Perb
adan
an P
utra
jaya
M
inis
try
of F
eder
al T
erri
tori
es
Spec
ial R
eser
ves
/ Zo
nes
Cont
rol
Spec
ial E
cono
mic
Zo
ne (E
.G T
RX
Exch
ange
)M
inis
try
of F
inan
ce
Mul
timed
ia S
uper
Co
rrid
or Z
ones
Min
istr
y of
Fin
ance
AN
D
Mul
timed
ia D
evel
opm
ent C
orpo
ratio
n
Her
itage
Zon
es
Her
itage
Co
mm
issi
on
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R Pe
rbad
anan
Pu
traj
aya
Min
istr
y of
Fed
eral
Te
rrito
ries
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs/
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
try
Her
itage
Com
mis
sion
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R Pe
rbad
anan
Put
raja
ya M
inis
try
of F
eder
al
Terr
itori
es
Nat
iona
l Her
itage
Act
20
05
Tabl
e 3-
2 Co
ntin
ued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 29
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Rive
r Res
erve
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmet
n of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dra
inag
e)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Res
ourc
es &
En
viro
nmen
t
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmet
n of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
O
R Pr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmet
n of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
O
R Pe
rbad
anan
Pu
traj
aya
Min
istr
y of
Fed
eral
Te
rrito
ries
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmet
n of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dra
inag
e)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Res
ourc
es &
En
viro
nmen
t
Wat
ers
Act 1
920
(Act
41
8)
Eart
hwor
ks (P
erba
dana
n Pu
traj
aya)
By-
Law
s 19
96
Fore
st R
eser
veFo
rest
ry D
epar
tmen
t M
inis
try
of N
atur
al R
esou
rces
& E
nvir
onm
ent
Nat
iona
l For
estr
y Ac
t 19
84 (A
men
dmen
t 199
3)
Rest
rict
ed Z
ones
M
inis
try
of H
ome
Affai
rsPr
otec
ted
Area
s An
d Pr
otec
ted
Plac
es A
ct 1
959
30 Annexes
Tabl
e 3-
3: In
stit
utio
nal M
ap: S
elan
gor
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Zoni
ng &
Lan
d us
eSe
lang
or S
tate
Go
vern
men
tJa
bata
n Pe
ranc
anga
n &
Pem
bang
unan
M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
Jaba
tan
Pera
ncan
gan
& P
emba
ngun
an
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an A
ND/
OR
Sela
ngor
Sta
te G
over
nmen
t
Jaba
tan
Pera
ncan
gan
&
Pem
bang
unan
M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
Tow
n An
d Co
untr
y Pl
anni
ng A
ct 1
976
[Act
17
2]
Amen
dmen
ts
Road
Net
wor
k (i
nclu
des
Stre
et L
ight
ing)
Priv
ate
Hig
hway
sM
inis
try
of W
orks
Lem
baga
Leb
uhra
ya
Mal
aysi
a Pr
ivat
e Co
nces
sion
aire
Lem
baga
Leb
uhra
ya
Mal
aysi
a Pr
ivat
e Co
nces
sion
aire
Act 2
31 H
ighw
ay
Auth
ority
Mal
aysi
a (I
ncor
pora
tion)
Act
19
80
Fede
ral H
ighw
ays
/ Ro
ads
Min
istr
y of
Wor
ksJa
bata
n Ke
rja
Raya
(Dep
artm
ent o
f Pub
lic W
orks
) M
inis
try
of W
orks
Fede
ral R
oad
Act 1
959
Stat
e Ro
ads
Sela
ngor
Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent
Jaba
tan
Keju
rute
raan
M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an A
ND/
OR
Sela
ngor
Sta
te G
over
nmen
t
Jaba
tan
Pera
ncan
gan
&
Pem
bang
unan
M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
Road
Tra
nspo
rt A
ct
1987
St
reet
, Dra
inag
e an
d Bu
ildin
g Ac
t 197
4 (1
994)
Tran
spor
t Net
wor
k
Publ
ic P
arki
ngSe
lang
or S
tate
Go
vern
men
tM
unic
ipal
OR
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
Sela
ngor
Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
Publ
ic C
ar P
arki
ng
By-L
aws
(MPS
J) 20
07
Tran
spor
tatio
n O
rder
(C
ar P
ark
Allo
catio
n Ro
ad) (
MPA
J) 20
07
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 31
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Priv
ate
Park
ing
Sela
ngor
Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent
Mun
icip
al O
R Pr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
anPr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Priv
ate
Car P
arks
Li
cens
ing
By-L
aws
(MBP
J) 20
07
Priv
ate
Car P
ark
Lice
nsin
g (M
PAJ)
(Am
endm
ent)
200
7 Pr
ivat
e Ve
hicl
es
Park
ing
Spac
e Li
cens
ing
By-L
aw
(MPK
J) (A
men
dmen
t)
2007
Pr
ivat
e Ca
r Par
k Li
cens
ing
(MPS
epan
g)
2005
Pr
ivat
e Ca
r Par
k Li
cens
ing
(MPS
) 200
5 By
law
For
Pri
vate
Ca
rpar
k Li
cens
e (M
PK)
2005
Bus
Net
wor
k &
St
atio
nsSu
ruha
njay
a Pe
ngan
gkut
an A
wam
Dar
at (S
PAD)
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
Sela
ngor
Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent
Suru
hanj
aya
Peng
angk
utan
Aw
am D
arat
(S
PAD)
Land
Pub
lic T
rans
port
Ac
t 201
0
Rail
Net
wor
k &
St
atio
nsSu
ruha
njay
a Pe
ngan
gkut
an A
wam
Dar
at
(SPA
D)Fe
dera
l ow
ned
Cor
pora
tions
KT
MB
(Ker
etap
i Tan
ah M
elay
u Be
rhad
)
Suru
hanj
aya
Peng
angk
utan
Aw
am D
arat
(SPA
D)
KTM
B (K
eret
api
Tana
h M
elay
u Be
rhad
)
Land
Pub
lic T
rans
port
Ac
t 201
0
Taxi
s &
Tax
i Sto
pSu
ruha
njay
a Pe
ngan
gkut
an A
wam
Dar
at (S
PAD)
Land
Pub
lic T
rans
port
Ac
t 201
0
Oth
er L
and
Publ
ic
Tran
spor
tSu
ruha
njay
a Pe
ngan
gkut
an A
wam
Dar
at (S
PAD)
Land
Pub
lic T
rans
port
Ac
t 201
0
Airp
orts
Depa
rtm
ent o
f Civ
il Av
iatio
n
Min
istr
y of
Tra
nspo
rtM
alay
sia
Airp
orts
Hol
ding
s Be
rhad
Depa
rtm
ent o
f Civ
il Av
iatio
n
Min
istr
y of
Tra
nspo
rtCi
vil A
viat
ion
Act 1
969
Cycl
ing
Net
wor
kSe
lang
or S
tate
Go
vern
men
tM
ajlis
Per
band
aran
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
Sela
ngor
Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
Pede
stri
an N
etw
ork
Sela
ngor
Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
Sela
ngor
Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
32 Annexes
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Drai
nage
& Ir
riga
tion
(Flo
od M
itiga
tion)
- N
on P
riva
tised
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of I
rrig
atio
n &
Dra
inag
e)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Res
ourc
es &
En
viro
nmen
t
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
OR
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
Sela
ngor
Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of I
rrig
atio
n &
Dra
inag
e)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Res
ourc
es &
En
viro
nmen
t
Drai
nage
Wor
ks A
ct
1954
(198
8)
Drai
nage
& Ir
riga
tion
(Loc
al D
rain
age
Net
wor
k)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
Mun
icip
al O
R Pr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
Stre
et, D
rain
age
and
Build
ing
Act 1
974
(199
4)
Loca
l Gov
ernm
ent A
ct
(197
6): (
Peni
nsul
ar)
Tow
n an
d Co
untr
y Pl
anni
ng A
ct 1
976
Eart
hWor
ks B
y La
w
(MPS
J) 20
07
Sew
erag
e
Suru
hanj
aya
Perk
hidm
atan
Ai
r Neg
ara
- SP
AN (N
atio
nal
Wat
er S
ervi
ces
Com
mis
sion
Jaba
tan
Perk
hidm
atan
Pe
mbe
ntun
gan
(Sew
erag
e Se
rvic
es
Depa
rtm
ent)
M
inis
try
of E
nerg
y,
Gree
n Te
chno
logy
&
Wat
er (K
ETTH
A)
Inda
h W
ater
Kon
sort
ium
(IW
K)
Suru
hanj
aya
Perk
hidm
atan
Ai
r Neg
ara
- SP
AN (N
atio
nal
Wat
er S
ervi
ces
Com
mis
sion
) AN
D
Jaba
tan
Alam
Se
kita
r (D
epar
tmen
t of
Envi
ronm
ent)
M
inis
try
of N
atur
al
Reso
urce
s an
d En
viro
nmen
t
Inda
h W
ater
Ko
nsor
tium
(IW
K)
Sew
erag
e Se
rvic
es A
ct
1993
(Act
508
) Ac
t 654
Sur
uhan
jaya
Pe
rkhi
dmat
an A
ir
Neg
ara
Act 2
006
Tabl
e 3-
3 Co
ntin
ued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 33
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Solid
Was
te
(Col
lect
ion)
Sela
ngor
Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an (M
unic
ipal
ity)
Colle
ctio
n, D
ispo
sal
And
Clea
ranc
e O
f Tra
sh
By-L
aws
(MBP
J) 20
07
Colle
ctio
n, D
ispo
sal
And
Clea
ranc
e O
f Tra
sh
By-L
aws
(MPS
J) 20
07
Was
te C
olle
ctio
n An
d Di
spos
al (M
PAJ)
2007
Co
llect
ion,
Dis
card
And
Di
spos
al O
f Gar
bage
By
-Law
(MPK
J) 20
07
Was
te C
olle
ctio
n An
d Di
spos
al (M
PAJ)
2007
CO
LLEC
TIO
N, D
ISCA
RD
AND
DISP
OSA
L O
F GA
RBAG
E BY
-LAW
(M
BSA)
200
7 CO
LLEC
TIO
N, D
ISCA
RD
AND
DISP
OSA
L O
F Ga
rbag
e By
-Law
(MPS
) 20
07
Colle
ctin
g,Ex
puls
ion
and
Disp
osal
Byl
aw
(MPK
) 200
7
Solid
Was
te (D
ispo
sal
- Pub
lic)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an S
isa
Pepe
jal N
egar
a
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id W
aste
Man
agem
ent
Depa
rtm
ent)
M
inis
try
of U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng &
Lo
cal G
over
nmen
t
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
(Mun
icip
ality
)
Jaba
tan
Alam
Se
kita
r (D
epar
tmen
t of
Envi
ronm
ent)
M
inis
try
of N
atur
al
Reso
urce
s an
d En
viro
nmen
t
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
Neg
ara
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id
Was
te M
anag
emen
t De
part
men
t)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Act 6
72 -
Solid
Was
te
and
Publ
ic C
lean
sing
M
anag
emen
t Act
200
7
(effl
uent
)
Solid
Was
te (D
ispo
sal
- Pri
vate
)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
Neg
ara
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id
Was
te M
anag
emen
t De
part
men
t)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Priv
ate
Conc
essi
onai
re
Jaba
tan
Alam
Se
kita
r (D
epar
tmen
t of
Envi
ronm
ent)
M
inis
try
of N
atur
al
Reso
urce
s an
d En
viro
nmen
t
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
Neg
ara
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id
Was
te M
anag
emen
t De
part
men
t)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Act 6
72 -
Solid
Was
te
and
Publ
ic C
lean
sing
M
anag
emen
t Act
200
7 L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
(Am
endm
ent)
Act
200
7
34 Annexes
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Wat
er
Suru
hanj
aya
Perk
hidm
atan
Ai
r Neg
ara
- SP
AN (N
atio
nal
Wat
er S
ervi
ces
Com
mis
sion
)
Jaba
tan
Beka
lan
Air
(Sew
erag
e Se
rvic
es
Depa
rtm
ent)
M
inis
try
of E
nerg
y,
Gree
n Te
chno
logy
&
Wat
er (K
ETTH
A)
Syar
ikat
Bek
alan
Air
Sel
ango
r Bhd
(S
yaba
s), P
unca
k N
iaga
Sdn
Bhd
(PN
SB),
Kons
ortiu
m A
bbas
Sdn
Bhd
(Abb
as) a
nd
Syar
ikat
Pen
gelu
ar A
ir S
elan
gor H
oldi
ngs
Bhd
(Spl
ash)
.
Suru
hanj
aya
Perk
hidm
atan
Ai
r Neg
ara
- SP
AN (N
atio
nal
Wat
er S
ervi
ces
Com
mis
sion
)
Syar
ikat
Bek
alan
Ai
r Sel
ango
r Bhd
(S
yaba
s), P
unca
k N
iaga
Sdn
Bhd
(P
NSB
), Ko
nsor
tium
Ab
bas
Sdn
Bhd
(Abb
as) a
nd
Syar
ikat
Pen
gelu
ar
Air S
elan
gor
Hol
ding
s Bh
d (S
plas
h).
Act 6
54 –
Sur
uhan
jaya
Pe
rkhi
dmat
an A
ir
Neg
ara
ACT
2006
Ac
t 655
- W
ater
Ser
vice
In
dust
ry A
ct 2
006
Elec
tric
ity N
etw
ork
(Dis
trib
utio
n)Su
ruha
njay
a Te
naga
Tena
ga N
asio
nal
Berh
ad
Tena
ga N
asio
nal
Berh
ad O
R Pr
ivat
e De
velo
per
Tena
ga N
asio
nal
Berh
adSu
ruha
njay
a Te
naga
Tena
ga N
asio
nal
Berh
ad
Act 6
10 -
Ener
gy
Com
mis
sion
Act
200
1 Ac
t 447
- El
ectr
icity
Su
pply
Act
199
0
Tele
com
mun
icat
ions
N
etw
ork
Mal
aysi
a Co
mm
unic
atio
ns a
nd M
ultim
edia
Co
mm
issi
onPr
ivat
e Te
leco
mm
unic
atio
ns C
ompa
nies
Mal
aysi
a Co
mm
unic
atio
ns a
nd M
ultim
edia
Co
mm
issi
on
Com
mun
icat
ions
and
M
ultim
edia
Act
199
8 Co
mm
unic
atio
ns
and
Mul
timed
ia
Com
mis
sion
Act
(199
8)
Gas
Supp
lySu
ruha
njay
a Te
naga
Gas
Mal
aysi
a Be
rhad
( M
MC
Com
pany
)Su
ruha
njay
a Te
naga
Gas
Mal
aysi
a Be
rhad
(MM
C Co
mpa
ny)
Gas
Supp
ly A
ct 1
993
Publ
ic B
uild
ings
and
Ser
vice
s
Tabl
e 3-
3 Co
ntin
ued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 35
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Publ
ic M
arke
ts &
H
awke
rsM
ajlis
Per
band
aran
AN
D/O
R Se
lang
or S
tate
Gov
ernm
ent
Mun
icip
al A
ND/
OR
Jaba
tan
Alam
Se
kita
r (D
epar
tmen
t of
Envi
ronm
ent)
M
inis
try
of N
atur
al
Reso
urce
s an
d En
viro
nmen
t
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
Haw
kers
By-
Law
s (M
PSJ)
2007
M
arke
ts B
y-La
ws
(MPS
J) 20
07
Trad
e, B
usin
ess
and
Indu
stri
al B
y-La
ws
(MBP
J) 20
07
Mar
kets
(MPA
J) 20
07
Haw
kers
(MPA
J) 20
07
HAW
KERS
BY-
LAW
(M
PKj)
2007
H
awke
rs (M
PSEP
ANG)
20
07
Mar
kets
(MPS
EPAN
G)
2007
H
awke
rs B
y-La
ws
(MPS
) 200
7 M
arke
ts B
y-La
ws
(MPS
) 20
07
Haw
ker B
ylaw
(MPK
) 20
07
Mar
ket B
ylaw
(MPK
) 20
07
Ope
n Sp
aces
& P
ublic
Pa
rks
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an A
ND/
OR
Sela
ngor
Sta
te G
over
nmen
tM
ajlis
Per
band
aran
Park
(MPA
J) (A
men
dmen
t) 2
007
PARK
S BY
-LAW
(MPK
j)(
Amen
dmen
ts) 2
007
Park
(MPS
EPAN
G)
2005
Pa
rk (M
BSA)
200
5 Pa
rk (M
PS)
2005
Pa
rk B
ylaw
(MPK
) 20
05
36 Annexes
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Polic
e St
atio
ns
Min
istr
y of
Hom
e Aff
airs
AN
D/O
R
Jaba
tan
Pera
ncan
g Ba
ndar
dan
Des
a
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent
Polis
Dir
aja
Mal
aysi
a
(Pol
ice
Depa
rtm
ent)
Min
istr
y of
Hom
e Aff
airs
Min
istr
y of
Hom
e Aff
airs
Fire
Sta
tions
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent
Fire
Dep
artm
ent (
BOM
BA) M
inis
try
of U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng a
nd L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Fire
Ser
vice
s Ac
t 198
8 (A
ct 3
41)
Hos
pita
ls a
nd
Med
ical
Car
e
Min
istr
y of
Hea
lth
AND/
OR
Ja
bata
n Pe
ranc
ang
Band
ar d
an D
esa
M
inis
try
of
Urb
an W
ellb
eing
, H
ousi
ng a
nd L
ocal
Go
vern
men
t
Baha
gian
Pem
bang
unan
M
inis
try
of H
ealth
OR
Priv
ate
Hos
pita
lM
inis
try
of H
ealth
O
R Pr
ivat
e H
ospi
tal
Min
istr
y of
Hea
lth
Scho
ols
Min
istr
y of
Edu
catio
n
Inst
itute
of H
ighe
r Le
arni
ngM
inis
try
of H
ighe
r Edu
catio
n
Libr
arie
sM
inis
try
of In
form
atio
n, C
omm
unic
atio
n an
d Cu
lture
Art &
Cul
tura
l Cen
ters
Min
istr
y of
Info
rmat
ion,
Com
mun
icat
ion
and
Cultu
re
Hot
els
Min
istr
y of
Tou
rism
&
Cul
ture
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsM
inis
try
of T
ouri
sm &
Cul
ture
Innk
eepe
rs A
ct 1
952
Hom
es, N
urse
ries
&
Kind
erga
rden
s
Min
istr
y of
W
omen
, Fam
ily
& C
omm
unity
De
velo
pmen
t
Priv
ate
Busi
ness
Ow
ner
Wel
fare
Dep
artm
ent
Min
istr
y of
W
omen
, Fam
ily
& C
omm
unity
De
velo
pmen
t
Min
istr
y of
W
omen
, Fam
ily
& C
omm
unity
De
velo
pmen
t
Act 3
08 C
hild
Car
e Ce
ntre
Act
198
4
Com
mun
ity
Cent
ers
(Inc
ludi
ng
Spor
ts F
acili
ties,
M
ultip
urpo
se H
alls
, et
c)
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an A
ND/
OR
Sela
ngor
Sta
te G
over
nmen
t
Tabl
e 3-
3 Co
ntin
ued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 37
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Publ
ic H
ousi
ng-P
PR
(Fun
ded
Fede
ral)
Jaba
tan
Peru
mah
an N
egar
aM
ajlis
Per
band
aran
Publ
ic H
ousi
ng-P
PR
(Sta
te F
unde
d)Le
mba
ga P
erum
ahan
& H
arta
nah
Sela
ngor
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
Adve
rtis
emen
ts
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
Sela
ngor
Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent
Priv
ate
Com
pani
es
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
Sela
ngor
Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent
Priv
ate
Com
pani
es
Adve
rtis
emen
t By-
Law
s (M
BPJ)
2007
Ad
vert
isem
ent (
MPA
J) 20
07
ADVE
RTIS
EMEN
T BY
-LAW
(MPK
j)200
7 A
dver
tisem
ent
(MPS
EPAN
G) 2
007
Adv
ertis
emen
t (M
BSA)
20
07
Adv
ertis
emen
t (M
PS)
2005
Ad
vert
isem
ent B
ylaw
(M
PK) 2
007
Traffi
c M
anag
emen
t/
Cong
estio
n Co
ntro
l an
d M
onito
ring
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
(Loc
al M
unic
ipal
) A
ND/
OR
Polic
e Di
raja
Mal
aysi
a (P
DRM
)
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an A
ND/
OR
Sela
ngor
Sta
te G
over
nmen
t
Land
Val
uatio
ns
(Sta
te L
and)
Valu
atio
n an
d Pr
oper
ty M
anag
emen
t Dep
artm
ent (
Mun
icip
al)
Loca
l Gov
ernm
ent A
ct
171
Land
Val
uatio
ns
(Fed
eral
Lan
d)Va
luat
ion
and
Prop
erty
Ser
vice
s De
part
men
t, M
inis
try
of F
inan
ce
Build
ing
Cont
rol
Com
mer
cial
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
(Mun
icip
al)
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsPr
ivat
e O
wne
rs/
JMB
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
(Mun
icip
al)
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
1. S
tree
t, Dr
aina
ge A
nd
Build
ing
Act 1
974
2.
Uni
form
ed B
uild
ing
Byla
w (S
elan
gor)
198
6 3.
Bui
ldin
g an
d Co
mm
on P
rope
rty
(Mai
nten
ance
and
M
anag
emen
t) A
ct 2
007
[Act
663
] Ro
ad, D
rain
and
Bu
ildin
g (M
PSEP
ANG)
20
05
38 Annexes
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Resi
dent
ial
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
(Mun
icip
al)
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsPr
ivat
e O
wne
rs/
JMB
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
(Mun
icip
al)
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
1. S
tree
t, Dr
aina
ge A
nd
Build
ing
Act 1
974
2.
Uni
form
ed B
uild
ing
Byla
w (S
elan
gor)
198
6 3.
Hou
sing
De
velo
pmen
t (Co
ntro
l an
d Li
cens
ing)
196
6 [A
ct 1
18]
4. B
uild
ing
and
Com
mon
Pro
pert
y (M
aint
enan
ce a
nd
Man
agem
ent)
Act
200
7 [A
ct 6
63]
Road
, Dra
in a
nd
Build
ing
(MPS
EPAN
G)
2005
Publ
ic B
uild
ings
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
(Mun
icip
al)
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
trie
s
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
(Mun
icip
al)
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
1. S
tree
t, Dr
aina
ge A
nd
Build
ing
Act 1
974
2.
Uni
form
ed B
uild
ing
Byla
w (S
elan
gor)
198
6 Ro
ad, D
rain
and
Bu
ildin
g (M
PSEP
ANG)
20
05
Her
itage
Bui
ldin
gs
Her
itage
Co
mm
issi
on
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs/
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
try
Her
itage
Com
mis
sion
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(Mun
icip
al)
Nat
iona
l Her
itage
Act
20
05
No
Fly
Zone
s (B
uild
ing
Hei
ghts
)
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
(Dep
artm
ent o
f Av
iatio
n) A
ND
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
(Mun
icip
al)
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
(Dep
artm
ent o
f Av
iatio
n)
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsM
inis
try
of T
rans
port
(Dep
artm
ent
of A
viat
ion)
AN
D M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Tabl
e 3-
3 Co
ntin
ued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 39
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Spec
ial R
eser
ves
/ Zo
nes
Cont
rol
Spec
ial E
cono
mic
Zo
ne (E
.G T
RX
Exch
ange
)M
inis
try
of F
inan
ce
Mul
timed
ia S
uper
Co
rrid
or Z
ones
Min
istr
y of
Fin
ance
AN
D
Mul
timed
ia D
evel
opm
ent C
orpo
ratio
n
Sta
te S
peci
al
Econ
omic
Zon
es
(i.e
Por
t Kla
ng F
ree
Zone
)
Stat
e Go
vern
men
t
Her
itage
Zon
es
Herit
age
Com
mis
sion
M
alay
sia
AND/
OR
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
(Mun
icip
al)
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs/
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
try
Her
itage
Com
mis
sion
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(Mun
icip
al)
Nat
iona
l Her
itage
Act
20
05
Rive
r Res
erve
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of I
rrig
atio
n &
Dra
inag
e)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Res
ourc
es &
En
viro
nmen
t
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
O
R Pr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
O
R M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of I
rrig
atio
n &
Dra
inag
e)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Res
ourc
es &
En
viro
nmen
t
Wat
ers
Act 1
920
(Act
41
8)
Eart
hwor
ks B
y-La
ws
(MPK
j) 20
07
Eart
hwor
ks B
y-La
ws
(Mbs
a) 2
007
Eart
hwor
ks B
y-La
ws
(Mps
) 200
7
Fore
st R
eser
veFo
rest
ry D
epar
tmen
t M
inis
try
of N
atur
al R
esou
rces
& E
nvir
onm
ent
Nat
iona
l For
estr
y Ac
t 19
84 (A
men
dmen
t 19
93)
Rest
rict
ed Z
ones
M
inis
try
of H
ome
Affai
rsPr
otec
ted
Area
s An
d Pr
otec
ted
Plac
es A
ct 1
959
40 Annexes
Tabl
e 3-
4: I
nsti
tuti
onal
Map
: Pen
ang
Stat
e
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Zoni
ng &
Lan
d us
ePe
nang
Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent
Jaba
tan
Pera
ncan
gan
Pem
bang
unan
M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
Jaba
tan
Pera
ncan
gan
Pem
bang
unan
M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
AN
D/O
R Pe
nang
Sta
te G
over
nmen
t
Jaba
tan
Pera
ncan
gan
Pem
bang
unan
M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
Loca
l Gov
ernm
ent A
ct
1976
(Act
171
) To
wn
and
Coun
try
Plan
ning
Act
197
6 (A
ct
172)
To
wn
and
Coun
try
Plan
ning
(Am
endm
ent)
Ac
t 199
5 (A
933
) Pl
anni
ng C
ontr
ol
(Gen
eral
) Rul
es 1
990
Act 1
72
Rule
s fo
r the
pr
epar
atio
n of
Str
uctu
re
and
Loca
l Pla
n 19
89
Stre
et, D
rain
age
and
Build
ing
Act 1
974
Nat
iona
l Lan
d Co
de
1965
Road
Net
wor
k (i
nclu
des
Stre
et L
ight
ing)
Priv
ate
Hig
hway
sM
inis
try
of W
orks
Lem
baga
Leb
uhra
ya
Mal
aysi
a Pr
ivat
e Co
nces
sion
aire
Lem
baga
Leb
uhra
ya
Mal
aysi
a Pr
ivat
e Co
nces
sion
aire
Act 2
31 H
ighw
ay
Auth
ority
Mal
aysi
a (I
ncor
pora
tion)
Act
19
80
Fede
ral H
ighw
ays
/ Ro
ads
Min
istr
y of
Wor
ksJa
bata
n Ke
rja
Raya
(Dep
artm
ent o
f Pub
lic W
orks
) M
inis
try
of W
orks
Fede
ral R
oad
Act 1
959
Stat
e Ro
ads
Pena
ng S
tate
Go
vern
men
tJa
bata
n Ke
juru
tera
an
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
anM
ajlis
Per
band
aran
AN
D/O
R Pe
nang
Sta
te G
over
nmen
t
Jaba
tan
Pera
ncan
gan
&
Pem
bang
unan
M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
Road
Tra
nspo
rt A
ct 1
987
Stre
et, D
rain
age
and
Build
ing
Act 1
974
Tran
spor
t Net
wor
k
Publ
ic P
arki
ngPe
nang
Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an O
R Pr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
Pena
ng S
tate
G
over
nmen
t
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il of
Pe
nang
Isla
nd C
ar P
ark
(Tic
ket S
yste
m) O
rder
, 19
92
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il of
Pe
nang
Isla
nd C
ar P
ark
(Met
er S
yste
m) O
rder
, 19
92
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 41
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Priv
ate
Park
ing
Pena
ng S
tate
Go
vern
men
tM
unic
ipal
OR
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
anPr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il of
Pe
nang
Isla
nd (P
riva
te
Car P
arks
) By-
Law
s,
1988
Bus
Net
wor
k &
St
atio
nsSu
ruha
njay
a Pe
ngan
gkut
an A
wam
Dar
at (S
PAD)
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
Pena
ng S
tate
G
over
nmen
t
Suru
hanj
aya
Peng
angk
utan
Aw
am D
arat
(S
PAD)
Land
Pub
lic T
rans
port
Ac
t 201
0
Rail
Net
wor
k &
St
atio
nsSu
ruha
njay
a Pe
ngan
gkut
an A
wam
Dar
at
(SPA
D)Fe
dera
l ow
ned
Cor
pora
tion
s
KTM
B (K
eret
api T
anah
Mel
ayu
Berh
ad)
Suru
hanj
aya
Peng
angk
utan
Aw
am D
arat
(SPA
D)
KTM
B (K
eret
api
Tana
h M
elay
u Be
rhad
)
Land
Pub
lic T
rans
port
Ac
t 201
0
Taxi
s &
Tax
i Sto
pSu
ruha
njay
a Pe
ngan
gkut
an A
wam
Dar
at (S
PAD)
Land
Pub
lic T
rans
port
Ac
t 201
0
Oth
er L
and
Publ
ic
Tran
spor
tSu
ruha
njay
a Pe
ngan
gkut
an A
wam
Dar
at (S
PAD)
Land
Pub
lic T
rans
port
Ac
t 201
0
Airp
orts
Depa
rtm
ent o
f Civ
il Av
iatio
n
Min
istr
y of
Tra
nspo
rtM
alay
sia
Airp
orts
Hol
ding
s Be
rhad
Depa
rtm
ent o
f Civ
il Av
iatio
n
Min
istr
y of
Tra
nspo
rtCi
vil A
viat
ion
Act 1
969
Cycl
ing
Net
wor
kPe
nang
Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
Pena
ng S
tate
Go
vern
men
t
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
Pede
stri
an N
etw
ork
Pena
ng S
tate
Go
vern
men
tM
ajlis
Per
band
aran
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
Pena
ng S
tate
Go
vern
men
t
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
Drai
nage
&
Irri
gatio
n (F
lood
M
itiga
tion)
- N
on
Priv
atis
ed
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of I
rrig
atio
n &
Dra
inag
e)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Res
ourc
es &
En
viro
nmen
t
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
OR
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
Pena
ng S
tate
G
over
nmen
t
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of I
rrig
atio
n &
Dra
inag
e)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Res
ourc
es &
En
viro
nmen
t
Drai
nage
Wor
ks A
ct
1954
(198
8)
42 Annexes
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Drai
nage
&
Irri
gatio
n (L
ocal
Dr
aina
ge N
etw
ork)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
Mun
icip
al O
R Pr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
Stre
et, D
rain
age
and
Build
ing
Act 1
974
Lo
cal G
over
nmen
t Act
(1
976)
: (Pe
nins
ular
) To
wn
and
Coun
try
Plan
ning
Act
197
6 Ea
rthw
orks
197
5 (b
y la
w)
Sew
erag
e
Suru
hanj
aya
Perk
hidm
atan
Ai
r Neg
ara
- SP
AN (N
atio
nal
Wat
er S
ervi
ces
Com
mis
sion
Jaba
tan
Perk
hidm
atan
Pe
mbe
ntun
gan
(Sew
erag
e Se
rvic
es
Depa
rtm
ent)
M
inis
try
of E
nerg
y,
Gree
n Te
chno
logy
&
Wat
er (K
ETTH
A)
Inda
h W
ater
Kon
sort
ium
(IW
K)
Suru
hanj
aya
Perk
hidm
atan
Ai
r Neg
ara
- SP
AN (N
atio
nal
Wat
er S
ervi
ces
Com
mis
sion
) AN
D
Jaba
tan
Alam
Se
kita
r (D
epar
tmen
t of
Envi
ronm
ent)
M
inis
try
of N
atur
al
Reso
urce
s an
d En
viro
nmen
t
Inda
h W
ater
Ko
nsor
tium
(IW
K)
Sew
erag
e Se
rvic
es A
ct
1993
(Act
508
) Ac
t 654
Sur
uhan
jaya
Pe
rkhi
dmat
an A
ir
Neg
ara
Act 2
006
Sew
erag
e an
d Sa
nita
ry
Inst
alla
tion
1970
(by
law
) Dr
aina
ge, S
anita
tion
&
Sani
tary
Plu
mbi
ng 1
976
(by
law
)
Solid
Was
te
(Col
lect
ion)
Pena
ng S
tate
Go
vern
men
tM
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(Mun
icip
ality
)
Solid
Was
te
(Dis
posa
l - P
ublic
)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an S
isa
Pepe
jal N
egar
a
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id W
aste
Man
agem
ent
Depa
rtm
ent)
M
inis
try
of U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng &
Lo
cal G
over
nmen
t
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
(Mun
icip
ality
)
Jaba
tan
Alam
Se
kita
r (D
epar
tmen
t of
Envi
ronm
ent)
M
inis
try
of N
atur
al
Reso
urce
s an
d En
viro
nmen
t
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
Neg
ara
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id
Was
te M
anag
emen
t De
part
men
t)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Act 6
72 -
Solid
Was
te
and
Publ
ic C
lean
sing
M
anag
emen
t Act
200
7
(effl
uent
)
Tabl
e 3-
4 C
onti
nued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 43
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Solid
Was
te
(Dis
posa
l - P
riva
te)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
Neg
ara
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id
Was
te M
anag
emen
t De
part
men
t)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Priv
ate
Conc
essi
onai
re
Jaba
tan
Alam
Se
kita
r (D
epar
tmen
t of
Envi
ronm
ent)
M
inis
try
of N
atur
al
Reso
urce
s an
d En
viro
nmen
t
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
Neg
ara
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id
Was
te M
anag
emen
t De
part
men
t)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Act 6
72 -
Solid
Was
te
and
Publ
ic C
lean
sing
M
anag
emen
t Act
200
7 L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
(Am
endm
ent)
Act
200
7
Wat
er
Suru
hanj
aya
Perk
hidm
atan
Ai
r Neg
ara
- SP
AN (N
atio
nal
Wat
er S
ervi
ces
Com
mis
sion
)
Jaba
tan
Beka
lan
Air
(Sew
erag
e Se
rvic
es
Depa
rtm
ent)
M
inis
try
of E
nerg
y,
Gree
n Te
chno
logy
&
Wat
er (K
ETTH
A)
Perb
adan
an B
ekal
an A
ir P
ulau
Pin
ang
Sdn
Bhd
(PBA
PP)
Suru
hanj
aya
Perk
hidm
atan
Ai
r Neg
ara
- SP
AN (N
atio
nal
Wat
er S
ervi
ces
Com
mis
sion
)
Perb
adan
an
Beka
lan
Air P
ulau
Pi
nang
Sdn
Bhd
(P
BAPP
)
ACT
654
– Su
ruha
njay
a Pe
rkhi
dmat
an A
ir
Neg
ara
ACT
2006
AC
T 65
5 - W
ater
Ser
vice
In
dust
ry A
CT 2
006
Elec
tric
ity N
etw
ork
(Dis
trib
utio
n)Su
ruha
njay
a Te
naga
Tena
ga N
asio
nal
Berh
ad
Tena
ga N
asio
nal
Berh
ad O
R Pr
ivat
e De
velo
per
Tena
ga N
asio
nal
Berh
adSu
ruha
njay
a Te
naga
Tena
ga N
asio
nal
Berh
ad
Act 6
10 -
Ener
gy
Com
mis
sion
Act
200
1 Ac
t 447
- El
ectr
icity
Su
pply
Act
199
0
Tele
com
mun
icat
ions
N
etw
ork
Mal
aysi
a Co
mm
unic
atio
ns a
nd M
ultim
edia
Co
mm
issi
onPr
ivat
e Te
leco
mm
unic
atio
ns C
ompa
nies
Mal
aysi
a Co
mm
unic
atio
ns a
nd M
ultim
edia
Co
mm
issi
on
Com
mun
icat
ions
and
M
ultim
edia
Act
199
8 Co
mm
unic
atio
ns a
nd
Mul
timed
ia C
omm
issi
on
Act (
1998
)
Gas
Supp
lySu
ruha
njay
a Te
naga
Gas
Mal
aysi
a Be
rhad
( M
MC
Com
pany
)Su
ruha
njay
a Te
naga
Gas
Mal
aysi
a Be
rhad
( M
MC
Com
pany
)Ga
s Su
pply
Act
199
3
Publ
ic B
uild
ings
and
Ser
vice
s
Publ
ic M
arke
ts &
H
awke
rsM
ajlis
Per
band
aran
AN
D/O
R Pe
nang
Sta
te G
over
nmen
t
Mun
icip
al A
ND/
OR
Jaba
tan
Alam
Se
kita
r (D
epar
tmen
t of
Envi
ronm
ent)
M
inis
try
of N
atur
al
Reso
urce
s an
d En
viro
nmen
t
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
Haw
kers
By-
Law
s, 1
979;
H
awke
rs (A
men
dmen
t)
By-L
aws,
198
7; H
awke
rs
(Am
endm
ent)
By-
Law
s,
1991
Ope
n Sp
aces
&
Publ
ic P
arks
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an A
ND/
OR
Pena
ng S
tate
Gov
ernm
ent
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
anM
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
of
Pena
ng Is
land
(Par
ks)
By-la
ws,
199
3
44 Annexes
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Polic
e St
atio
ns
Min
istr
y of
Hom
e Aff
airs
AN
D/O
R
Jaba
tan
Pera
ncan
g Ba
ndar
dan
Des
a
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent
Polis
Dir
aja
Mal
aysi
a
(Pol
ice
Depa
rtm
ent)
M
inis
try
of H
ome
Affai
rsM
inis
try
of H
ome
Affai
rs
Fire
Sta
tions
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent
Fire
Dep
artm
ent (
BOM
BA)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an W
ellb
eing
, Hou
sing
and
Loc
al G
over
nmen
tFi
re S
ervi
ces
Act 1
988
(Act
341
)
Hos
pita
ls a
nd
Med
ical
Car
e
Min
istr
y of
Hea
lth
AND/
OR
Ja
bata
n Pe
ranc
ang
Band
ar d
an D
esa
M
inis
try
of
Urb
an W
ellb
eing
, H
ousi
ng a
nd L
ocal
Go
vern
men
t
Baha
gian
Pem
bang
unan
M
inis
try
of H
ealth
OR
Priv
ate
Hos
pita
lM
inis
try
of H
ealth
O
R Pr
ivat
e H
ospi
tal
Min
istr
y of
Hea
lth
Scho
ols
Min
istr
y of
Edu
catio
nEd
ucat
ion
Act 1
961
and
Scho
ols
(Gen
eral
) Re
gula
tions
195
0
Inst
itute
of H
ighe
r Le
arni
ngM
inis
try
of H
ighe
r Edu
catio
n
Libr
arie
sM
inis
try
of In
form
atio
n, C
omm
unic
atio
n an
d Cu
lture
.
Art &
Cul
tura
l Ce
nter
sM
inis
try
of In
form
atio
n, C
omm
unic
atio
n an
d Cu
lture
.
Hot
els
Min
istr
y of
Tou
rism
&
Cul
ture
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsM
inis
try
of T
ouri
sm &
Cul
ture
Innk
eepe
rs A
ct 1
952
Hom
es, N
urse
ries
&
Kind
erga
rden
s
Min
istr
y of
W
omen
, Fam
ily
& C
omm
unity
De
velo
pmen
t
Priv
ate
Busi
ness
Ow
ner
Wel
fare
Dep
artm
ent
Min
istr
y of
W
omen
, Fam
ily
& C
omm
unity
De
velo
pmen
t
Min
istr
y of
W
omen
, Fam
ily
& C
omm
unity
De
velo
pmen
t
Act 3
08 C
hild
Car
e Ce
ntre
Act
198
4 N
urse
ries
Act
198
4 N
ursi
ng H
ome
Act 1
993
Tabl
e 3-
4 C
onti
nued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 45
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Com
mun
ity
Cent
ers
(Inc
ludi
ng
Spor
ts F
acili
ties,
M
ultip
urpo
se H
alls
, et
c)
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an A
ND/
OR
Pena
ng S
tate
Gov
ernm
ent
Publ
ic H
ousi
ng-P
PR
(Fun
ded
Fede
ral)
Jaba
tan
Peru
mah
an N
egar
aM
ajlis
Per
band
aran
Publ
ic H
ousi
ng-P
PR
( Sta
te F
unde
d)
Adve
rtis
emen
ts
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
Pean
angS
tate
Go
vern
men
t
Priv
ate
Com
pani
es
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
Pena
ng S
tate
Go
vern
men
t
Priv
ate
Com
pani
es
Traffi
c M
anag
emen
t/
Cong
estio
n Co
ntro
l an
d M
onito
ring
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
(Loc
al M
unic
ipal
) A
ND/
OR
Polic
e Di
raja
Mal
aysi
a (P
DRM
)
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an A
ND/
OR
Pena
ng S
tate
Gov
ernm
ent
Land
Val
uatio
ns
(Sta
te L
and)
Valu
atio
n an
d Pr
oper
ty M
anag
emen
t Dep
artm
ent (
Mun
icip
al)
Loca
l Gov
ernm
ent A
ct,
1976
(Act
171
)
Land
Val
uatio
ns
(Fed
eral
Lan
d)Va
luat
ion
and
Prop
erty
Ser
vice
s De
part
men
t, M
inis
try
of F
inan
ce
Build
ing
Cont
rol
Com
mer
cial
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND
M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsPr
ivat
e O
wne
rs
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND
M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
1. S
tree
t, Dr
aina
ge A
nd
Build
ing
Act 1
974
2.
Uni
form
ed B
uild
ing
Byla
w 1
986
Resi
dent
ial
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND
M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsPr
ivat
e O
wne
rs
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND
M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
1. S
tree
t, Dr
aina
ge A
nd
Build
ing
Act 1
974
2.
Uni
form
ed B
uild
ing
Byla
w 1
986
46 Annexes
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Publ
ic B
uild
ings
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND
M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
trie
s
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND
M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
1. S
tree
t, Dr
aina
ge A
nd
Build
ing
Act 1
974
2.
Uni
form
ed B
uild
ing
Byla
w 1
986
Her
itage
Bui
ldin
gs
Her
itage
Co
mm
issi
on
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs/
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
try
Her
itage
Com
mis
sion
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(Mun
icip
al)
Nat
iona
l Her
itage
Act
20
05
No
Fly
Zone
s (B
uild
ing
Hei
ghts
)
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
(Dep
artm
ent o
f Av
iati
on) A
ND
M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
(Dep
artm
ent o
f Av
iati
on)
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsM
inis
try
of T
rans
port
(Dep
artm
ent
of A
viat
ion)
AN
D M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Spec
ial R
eser
ves
/ Zo
nes
Cont
rol
Sta
te S
peci
al
Econ
omic
Zon
es
(i.e
Por
t Kla
ng F
ree
Zone
)
Stat
e Go
vern
men
t
Her
itage
Zon
es
Her
itage
Co
mm
issi
on
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs/
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
try
Her
itage
Com
mis
sion
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(Mun
icip
al)
Nat
iona
l Her
itage
Act
20
05
Pera
tura
n U
ntuk
Ka
was
an P
emul
ihar
aan
& B
angu
nan-
Bang
unan
W
aris
an 2
009
Rive
r Res
erve
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of I
rrig
atio
n &
Dra
inag
e)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Res
ourc
es &
En
viro
nmen
t
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
O
R Pr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
O
R M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of I
rrig
atio
n &
Dra
inag
e)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Res
ourc
es &
En
viro
nmen
t
Wat
ers
Act 1
920
(Act
41
8)
Tabl
e 3-
4 C
onti
nued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 47
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Serv
ice
Del
iver
yRe
gula
tor
Dat
a D
epos
itor
yLe
gisl
atio
n
Fore
st R
eser
veFo
rest
ry D
epar
tmen
t M
inis
try
of N
atur
al R
esou
rces
& E
nvir
onm
ent
Nat
iona
l For
estr
y Ac
t 19
84 (A
men
dmen
t 19
93)
Rest
rict
ed Z
ones
M
inis
try
of H
ome
Affai
rsPr
otec
ted
Area
s An
d Pr
otec
ted
Plac
es A
ct 1
959
48 Annexes
Tabl
e 3-
5: In
stit
utio
nal M
ap: I
skan
dar M
alay
sia
Regi
on, J
ohor
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Zoni
ng &
Lan
d us
e
Joho
r Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND
* Is
kand
ar R
egio
nal
Deve
lopm
ent
Auth
ority
(IRD
A)
Jaba
tan
Pera
ncan
gan
& P
emba
ngun
an
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an A
ND
* IR
DA
Jaba
tan
Pera
ncan
gan
&
Pem
bang
unan
M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
AN
D/O
R Jo
hor S
tate
Go
vern
men
t AN
D *
IRDA
Jaba
tan
Pera
ncan
gan
&
Pem
bang
unan
M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
AN
D/O
R Jo
hor S
tate
Go
vern
men
t
Jaba
tan
Pera
ncan
gan
&
Pem
bang
unan
M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
AN
D *
IRDA
Tow
n An
d Co
untr
y Pl
anni
ng A
ct 1
976
[Act
17
2]
Amen
dmen
ts
Iska
ndar
Reg
iona
l De
velo
pmen
t Au
thor
ity
Act
2007
(Act
664
)
Road
Net
wor
k (i
nclu
des
Stre
et L
ight
ing)
Priv
ate
Hig
hway
sM
inis
try
of W
orks
Lem
baga
Leb
uhra
ya
Mal
aysi
a Pr
ivat
e Co
nces
sion
aire
Lem
baga
Leb
uhra
ya
Mal
aysi
a Pr
ivat
e Co
nces
sion
aire
Act 2
31 H
ighw
ay
Auth
ority
Mal
aysi
a (I
ncor
pora
tion)
Act
19
80
Fede
ral H
ighw
ays
/ Ro
ads
Min
istr
y of
Wor
ksAN
D *
IRDA
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya (D
epar
tmen
t of P
ublic
Wor
ks) M
inis
try
of W
orks
AND
* IR
DAFe
dera
l Roa
d Ac
t 195
9
Mun
icip
al R
oads
Joho
r Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
* IR
DA
Jaba
tan
Keju
rute
raan
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
* IR
DA
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an A
ND/
OR
Joho
r Sta
te G
over
nmen
t
Jaba
tan
Pera
ncan
gan
&
Pem
bang
unan
M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
AN
D *I
RDA
Road
Tra
nspo
rt A
ct
1987
St
reet
, Dra
inag
e an
d Bu
ildin
g Ac
t 197
4 (1
994)
Tran
spor
t Net
wor
k
Publ
ic P
arki
ng
Joho
r Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND/
OR
* IR
DA
Mun
icip
al O
R Pr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
OR
* IR
DA
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
Joho
r Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
Priv
ate
Park
ing
Joho
r Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent
Mun
icip
al O
R Pr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsM
ajlis
Per
band
aran
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs
Bus
Net
wor
k &
St
atio
ns
Suru
hanj
aya
Peng
angk
utan
Aw
am D
arat
(S
PAD)
AN
D/O
R
* IR
DA
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
* IR
DA
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
Joho
r Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent
Suru
hanj
aya
Peng
angk
utan
Aw
am D
arat
(SPA
D)
Suru
hanj
aya
Peng
angk
utan
Aw
am D
arat
(SPA
D)
AND/
OR
* IR
DA A
ND/
OR
Mun
icip
al
Land
Pub
lic T
rans
port
Ac
t 201
0
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 49
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Rail
Net
wor
k &
St
atio
ns
Suru
hanj
aya
Peng
angk
utan
Aw
am D
arat
(SPA
D)
Suru
hanj
aya
Peng
angk
utan
Aw
am D
arat
(SPA
D)
AND
*IRD
A
Fede
ral o
wne
d C
orpo
rati
ons
KT
MB
(Ker
etap
i Tan
ah M
elay
u Be
rhad
)
Suru
hanj
aya
Peng
angk
utan
Aw
am D
arat
(SPA
D)
KTM
B (K
eret
api
Tana
h M
elay
u Be
rhad
)
Land
Pub
lic T
rans
port
Ac
t 201
0
Taxi
s &
Tax
i Sto
pSu
ruha
njay
a Pe
ngan
gkut
an
Awam
Dar
at (S
PAD)
Suru
hanj
aya
Peng
angk
utan
Aw
am D
arat
(SPA
D)
AND
*IRD
A
Suru
hanj
aya
Peng
angk
utan
Aw
am D
arat
(SPA
D)La
nd P
ublic
Tra
nspo
rt
Act 2
010
Oth
er L
and
Publ
ic
Tran
spor
t
Suru
hanj
aya
Peng
angk
utan
Aw
am D
arat
(SPA
D)
Suru
hanj
aya
Peng
angk
utan
Aw
am D
arat
(SPA
D)
AND
*IRD
A
Suru
hanj
aya
Peng
angk
utan
Aw
am D
arat
(SPA
D)La
nd P
ublic
Tra
nspo
rt
Act 2
010
Airp
orts
Depa
rtm
ent o
f Civ
il Av
iatio
n
Min
istr
y of
Tra
nspo
rtM
alay
sia
Airp
orts
Hol
ding
s Be
rhad
Depa
rtm
ent o
f Civ
il Av
iatio
n
Min
istr
y of
Tra
nspo
rtCi
vil A
viat
ion
Act 1
969
Cycl
ing
Net
wor
kJo
hor S
tate
Go
vern
men
tM
ajlis
Per
band
aran
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
Joho
r Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
Pede
stri
an N
etw
ork
Joho
r Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
Joho
r Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
Drai
nage
& Ir
riga
tion
(Flo
od M
itiga
tion)
- N
on P
riva
tised
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge) A
ND
* IR
DA
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
OR
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs
AND/
OR
* IR
DA
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
OR
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
Joho
r Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Drai
nage
Wor
ks A
ct
1954
(198
8)
50 Annexes
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Drai
nage
& Ir
riga
tion
(Loc
al D
rain
age
Net
wor
k)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
Mun
icip
al O
R Pr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
AN
D
* IR
DA
Mun
icip
al O
R Pr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
anM
ajlis
Per
band
aran
AN
D/O
R *I
RDA
Sew
erag
e
Suru
hanj
aya
Perk
hidm
atan
Ai
r Neg
ara
- SP
AN (N
atio
nal
Wat
er S
ervi
ces
Com
mis
sion
AN
D
Bada
n Ka
wal
Se
tia N
eger
i Joh
or
(BAK
AJ)
Jaba
tan
Perk
hidm
atan
Pe
mbe
ntun
gan
(Sew
erag
e Se
rvic
es
Depa
rtm
ent)
M
inis
try
of E
nerg
y,
Gree
n Te
chno
logy
&
Wat
er (K
ETTH
A)
Inda
h W
ater
Kon
sort
ium
(IW
K)
Suru
hanj
aya
Perk
hidm
atan
Ai
r Neg
ara
- SP
AN (N
atio
nal
Wat
er S
ervi
ces
Com
mis
sion
) AN
D
Bada
n Ka
wal
Se
tia N
eger
i Joh
or
(BAK
AJ)
AND
Jaba
tan
Alam
Se
kita
r (D
epar
tmen
t of
Envi
ronm
ent)
M
inis
try
of N
atur
al
Reso
urce
s an
d En
viro
nmen
t
Inda
h W
ater
Ko
nsor
tium
(IW
K)
Sew
erag
e Se
rvic
es A
ct
1993
(Act
508
) Ac
t 654
Sur
uhan
jaya
Pe
rkhi
dmat
an A
ir
Neg
ara
Act 2
006
Solid
Was
te
(Col
lect
ion)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
Neg
ara
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id
Was
te M
anag
emen
t De
part
men
t)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Perb
adan
an P
engu
rusa
n Si
sa P
epej
al d
an
Pem
bers
ihan
Aw
am (P
PSPP
A)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an W
ellb
eing
, Hou
sing
&
Loca
l Gov
ernm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
Neg
ara
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id
Was
te M
anag
emen
t De
part
men
t)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Perb
adan
an
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
dan
Pe
mbe
rsih
an A
wam
(P
PSPP
A)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Solid
Was
te
Man
agem
ent a
nd P
ublic
Cl
eans
ing
Corp
orat
ion
Act 2
007
(Act
673
)
Solid
Was
te
(Dis
posa
l - P
ublic
)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
AND/
OR
*IRD
A
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
Neg
ara
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id
Was
te M
anag
emen
t De
part
men
t)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
AND/
OR
*IRD
A
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
Neg
ara
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id
Was
te M
anag
emen
t De
part
men
t)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
(Mun
icip
ality
)
Jaba
tan
Alam
Se
kita
r (D
epar
tmen
t of
Envi
ronm
ent)
M
inis
try
of N
atur
al
Reso
urce
s an
d En
viro
nmen
t
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
Neg
ara
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id
Was
te M
anag
emen
t De
part
men
t)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Act 6
72 -
Solid
Was
te
and
Publ
ic C
lean
sing
M
anag
emen
t Act
200
7
(effl
uent
)
Tabl
e 3-
5 Co
ntin
ued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 51
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Solid
Was
te
(Dis
posa
l - P
riva
te)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
Neg
ara
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id
Was
te M
anag
emen
t De
part
men
t)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
AND/
OR
*IRD
A
Priv
ate
Conc
essi
onai
re
Jaba
tan
Alam
Se
kita
r (D
epar
tmen
t of
Envi
ronm
ent)
M
inis
try
of N
atur
al
Reso
urce
s an
d En
viro
nmen
t
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
Neg
ara
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id
Was
te M
anag
emen
t De
part
men
t)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Act 6
72 -
Solid
Was
te
and
Publ
ic C
lean
sing
M
anag
emen
t Act
200
7 L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
(Am
endm
ent)
Act
200
7
Wat
er
Suru
hanj
aya
Perk
hidm
atan
Ai
r Neg
ara
- SP
AN (N
atio
nal
Wat
er S
ervi
ces
Com
mis
sion
) AN
D
Bada
n Ka
wal
Se
tia N
eger
i Joh
or
(BAK
AJ)
Jaba
tan
Beka
lan
Air
(Sew
erag
e Se
rvic
es
Depa
rtm
ent)
M
inis
try
of E
nerg
y,
Gree
n Te
chno
logy
&
Wat
er (K
ETTH
A)
Sya
rika
t Air
Joho
r (SA
J) H
oldi
ngs
Suru
hanj
aya
Perk
hidm
atan
Ai
r Neg
ara
- SP
AN (N
atio
nal
Wat
er S
ervi
ces
Com
mis
sion
) AN
D
Bada
n Ka
wal
Se
tia N
eger
i Joh
or
(BAK
AJ)
Sya
rika
t Air
Joho
r (S
AJ) H
oldi
ngs
Act 6
54 –
Sur
uhan
jaya
Pe
rkhi
dmat
an A
ir
Neg
ara
Act 2
006
Act 6
55 -
Wat
er S
ervi
ce
Indu
stry
Act
200
6
Elec
tric
ity N
etw
ork
(Dis
trib
utio
n)Su
ruha
njay
a Te
naga
Tena
ga N
asio
nal
Berh
ad A
ND
*IRD
A
Tena
ga N
asio
nal
Berh
ad O
R Pr
ivat
e De
velo
per
Tena
ga N
asio
nal
Berh
adSu
ruha
njay
a Te
naga
Tena
ga N
asio
nal
Berh
ad
Act 6
10 -
Ener
gy
Com
mis
sion
Act
200
1 Ac
t 447
- El
ectr
icity
Su
pply
Act
199
0
Tele
com
mun
icat
ions
N
etw
ork
Mal
aysi
a Co
mm
unic
atio
ns
and
Mul
timed
ia
Com
mis
sion
Mal
aysi
a Co
mm
unic
atio
ns
and
Mul
timed
ia
Com
mis
sion
AN
D *I
RDA
Priv
ate
Tele
com
mun
icat
ions
Com
pani
esM
alay
sia
Com
mun
icat
ions
and
Mul
timed
ia
Com
mis
sion
Com
mun
icat
ions
and
M
ultim
edia
Act
199
8 Co
mm
unic
atio
ns a
nd
Mul
timed
ia C
omm
issi
on
Act (
1998
)
Gas
Supp
lySu
ruha
njay
a Te
naga
Gas
Mal
aysi
a Be
rhad
(MM
C Co
mpa
ny)
Suru
hanj
aya
Tena
gaGa
s M
alay
sia
Berh
ad (
MM
C Co
mpa
ny)
Gas
Supp
ly A
ct 1
993
52 Annexes
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Publ
ic B
uild
ings
and
Ser
vice
s
Publ
ic M
arke
ts &
H
awke
rsM
ajlis
Per
band
aran
AN
D/O
R Jo
hor S
tate
Gov
ernm
ent
Mun
icip
al A
ND/
OR
Jaba
tan
Alam
Se
kita
r (D
epar
tmen
t of
Envi
ronm
ent)
M
inis
try
of N
atur
al
Reso
urce
s an
d En
viro
nmen
t
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
Ope
n Sp
aces
&
Publ
ic P
arks
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an A
ND/
OR
Joho
r Sta
te G
over
nmen
tM
ajlis
Per
band
aran
Polic
e St
atio
ns &
Se
rvic
es
Min
istr
y of
Hom
e Aff
airs
AN
D/O
R
Jaba
tan
Pera
ncan
g Ba
ndar
dan
Des
a
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya
(Pub
lic W
orks
De
part
men
t)
AND
Polis
Dir
aja
Mal
aysi
a
(Pol
ice
Depa
rtm
ent)
M
inis
try
of H
ome
Affai
rs A
ND
*IRD
A
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya
(Pub
lic W
orks
De
part
men
t)
AND
Polis
Dir
aja
Mal
aysi
a
(Pol
ice
Depa
rtm
ent)
M
inis
try
of H
ome
Affai
rs
Polis
Dir
aja
Mal
aysi
a
(Pol
ice
Depa
rtm
ent)
M
inis
try
of H
ome
Affai
rs
Min
istr
y of
Hom
e Aff
airs
Fire
Sta
tions
&
Serv
ices
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent
Fire
Dep
artm
ent (
BOM
BA)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an W
ellb
eing
, Hou
sing
and
Loc
al G
over
nmen
tFi
re S
ervi
ces
Act 1
988
(Act
341
)
Hos
pita
ls a
nd
Med
ical
Car
e
Min
istr
y of
Hea
lth
AND/
OR
Ja
bata
n Pe
ranc
ang
Band
ar d
an D
esa
M
inis
try
of
Urb
an W
ellb
eing
, H
ousi
ng a
nd L
ocal
Go
vern
men
t
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya (P
ublic
Wor
ks
Depa
rtm
ent)
AN
D Ba
hagi
an P
emba
ngun
an
Min
istr
y of
Hea
lth O
R Pr
ivat
e H
ospi
tal
Min
istr
y of
Hea
lth
OR
Priv
ate
Hos
pita
lM
inis
try
of H
ealth
Scho
ols
Min
istr
y of
Ed
ucat
ion
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya (P
ublic
Wor
ks
Depa
rtm
ent)
AN
D M
inis
try
of E
duca
tion
Min
istr
y of
Edu
catio
n
Inst
itute
of H
ighe
r Le
arni
ngM
inis
try
of H
ighe
r Ed
ucat
ion
Priv
ate
OR
Publ
ic E
duca
tion
Inst
itutio
n AN
D M
inis
try
of H
ighe
r Ed
ucat
ion
Min
istr
y of
Hig
her E
duca
tion
Libr
arie
sM
inis
try
of In
form
atio
n, C
omm
unic
atio
n an
d Cu
lture
Art &
Cul
tura
l Ce
nter
sM
inis
try
of In
form
atio
n, C
omm
unic
atio
n an
d Cu
lture
Hot
els
Min
istr
y of
Tou
rism
&
Cul
ture
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsM
inis
try
of T
ouri
sm &
Cul
ture
Innk
eepe
rs A
ct 1
952
Tabl
e 3-
5 Co
ntin
ued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 53
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Hom
es, N
urse
ries
&
Kind
erga
rten
s
Min
istr
y of
W
omen
, Fam
ily
& C
omm
unity
De
velo
pmen
t
Priv
ate
Busi
ness
Ow
ner
Wel
fare
Dep
artm
ent
Min
istr
y of
W
omen
, Fam
ily
& C
omm
unity
De
velo
pmen
t
Min
istr
y of
W
omen
, Fam
ily
& C
omm
unity
De
velo
pmen
t
Act 3
08 C
hild
Car
e Ce
ntre
Act
198
4
Com
mun
ity
Cent
ers
(Inc
ludi
ng
Spor
ts F
acili
ties,
M
ultip
urpo
se H
alls
, et
c)
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an A
ND/
OR
Joho
r Sta
te G
over
nmen
t
Publ
ic H
ousi
ng-P
PR
(Fun
ded
Fede
ral)
Jaba
tan
Peru
mah
an N
egar
aM
ajlis
Per
band
aran
Publ
ic H
ousi
ng-P
PR
(Sta
te)
Baha
gian
Per
umah
an
Setia
usah
a Ke
raja
an Jo
hor
Syar
ikat
Per
umah
an
Neg
ara
Berh
adM
ajlis
Per
band
aran
Baha
gian
Per
umah
an
Setia
usah
a Ke
raja
an Jo
hor
Adve
rtis
emen
ts
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
Joho
r Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent
Priv
ate
Com
pani
es
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
Joho
r Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent
Priv
ate
Com
pani
es
Traffi
c M
anag
emen
t/
Cong
estio
n Co
ntro
l an
d M
onito
ring
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
(Loc
al M
unic
ipal
) A
ND/
OR
Polic
e Di
raja
Mal
aysi
a (P
DRM
)
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an A
ND/
OR
Joho
r Sta
te G
over
nmen
t
Land
Val
uatio
ns
(Sta
te L
and)
Valu
atio
n an
d Pr
oper
ty M
anag
emen
t Dep
artm
ent (
Mun
icip
al)
Loca
l Gov
ernm
ent A
ct
171
Land
Val
uatio
ns
(Fed
eral
Lan
d)Va
luat
ion
and
Prop
erty
Ser
vice
s De
part
men
t, M
inis
try
of F
inan
ce
Build
ing
Cont
rol
Com
mer
cial
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
(Mun
icip
al)
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsPr
ivat
e O
wne
rs/
JMB
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
(Mun
icip
al)
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an1.
Str
eet,
Drai
nage
And
Bu
ildin
g Ac
t 197
4
54 Annexes
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Resi
dent
ial
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND
M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsPr
ivat
e O
wne
rs/
JMB
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND
M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
1. S
tree
t, Dr
aina
ge A
nd
Build
ing
Act 1
974
2.
Hou
sing
Dev
elop
men
t (C
ontr
ol a
nd L
icen
sing
) 19
66 [A
ct 1
18]
Publ
ic B
uild
ings
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND
M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
trie
s
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND
M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an1.
Str
eet,
Drai
nage
And
Bu
ildin
g Ac
t 197
4
Her
itage
Bui
ldin
gs
Her
itage
Co
mm
issi
on
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs/
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
try
Her
itage
Com
mis
sion
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(Mun
icip
al)
Nat
iona
l Her
itage
Act
20
05
No
Fly
Zone
s (B
uild
ing
Hei
ghts
)
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
(Dep
artm
ent o
f Av
iatio
n) A
ND
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
(Mun
icip
al)
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
(Dep
artm
ent o
f Av
iatio
n)
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsM
inis
try
of T
rans
port
(Dep
artm
ent
of A
viat
ion)
AN
D M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Spec
ial R
eser
ves
/ Zo
nes
Cont
rol
Iska
ndar
Mal
aysi
aM
inis
try
of F
inan
ce A
ND
IRDA
Iska
ndar
Reg
iona
l De
velo
pmen
t Au
thor
ity
Act
2007
(Act
664
)
Her
itage
Zon
es
Her
itage
Co
mm
issi
on
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs/
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
try
Her
itage
Com
mis
sion
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(Mun
icip
al)
Nat
iona
l Her
itage
Act
20
05
Tabl
e 3-
5 Co
ntin
ued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 55
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Rive
r Res
erve
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of I
rrig
atio
n &
Dra
inag
e)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Res
ourc
es &
En
viro
nmen
t
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
OR
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
OR
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
(Mun
icip
al)
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of I
rrig
atio
n &
Dra
inag
e)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Res
ourc
es &
En
viro
nmen
t
Wat
ers
Act 1
920
(Act
41
8)
Fore
st R
eser
veFo
rest
ry D
epar
tmen
t M
inis
try
of N
atur
al R
esou
rces
& E
nvir
onm
ent
Nat
iona
l For
estr
y Ac
t 19
84 (A
men
dmen
t 19
93)
Rest
rict
ed Z
ones
M
inis
try
of H
ome
Affai
rsPr
otec
ted
Area
s An
d Pr
otec
ted
Plac
es A
ct 1
959
56 Annexes
Tabl
e 3-
6: In
stit
utio
nal M
ap: E
ast C
oast
Eco
nom
ic C
orri
dor a
rea
/ Pa
hang
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Zoni
ng &
Lan
d us
e
Paha
ng S
tate
Go
vern
men
t AN
D Ea
st C
oast
Ec
onom
ic R
egio
n D
evel
opm
ent
Coun
cil (
ECER
DC)
Jaba
tan
Pera
ncan
gan
Pem
bang
unan
M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
AN
D EC
ERDC
Jaba
tan
Pera
ncan
gan
Pem
bang
unan
M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
AN
D EC
ERDC
AN
D/O
R Pa
hang
Sta
te G
over
nmen
t
Jaba
tan
Pera
ncan
gan
Pem
bang
unan
M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
AN
D/O
R Pa
hang
St
ate
Gove
rnm
ent
Jaba
tan
Pera
ncan
agan
Pe
mba
ngun
an
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND
ECER
DC
Tow
n An
d Co
untr
y Pl
anni
ng A
ct 1
976
[Act
17
2] A
men
dmen
ts
Nat
iona
l Lan
d Co
de
1965
(Act
56)
Ea
st C
oast
Eco
nom
ic
Regi
on D
evel
opm
ent
Coun
cil A
ct 2
008
(Act
68
8)
Road
Net
wor
k
Priv
ate
Hig
hway
sM
inis
try
of W
orks
Lem
baga
Leb
uhra
ya
Mal
aysi
a Pr
ivat
e Co
nces
sion
aire
Lem
baga
Leb
uhra
ya
Mal
aysi
a Pr
ivat
e Co
nces
sion
aire
Act 2
31 H
ighw
ay
Auth
ority
Mal
aysi
a (I
ncor
pora
tion)
Act
19
80
Fede
ral H
ighw
ays
/ Ro
ads
Min
istr
y of
Wor
ks
AND
ECER
DCJa
bata
n Ke
rja
Raya
(Dep
artm
ent o
f Pub
lic W
orks
) Min
istr
y of
Wor
ks
AND
ECER
DCFe
dera
l Roa
d Ac
t 195
9
Mun
icip
al R
oads
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
ECER
DCAN
D Pa
hang
Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent
Jaba
tan
Keju
rute
raan
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
ECER
DC
Priv
ate
Conc
essi
onai
re,
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
Paha
ng
Stat
e Go
vern
men
t
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
Paha
ng
Stat
e Go
vern
men
t
Jaba
tan
Pera
ncan
gan
Pem
bang
unan
M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
Road
Tra
nspo
rt A
ct 1
987
Stre
et, D
rain
age
and
Build
ing
Act 1
974
(199
4)
Stre
et, D
rain
age
and
Build
ing
By-la
w
(Com
poun
ding
Offe
nses
) (M
PK) 1
983
Tran
spor
t Net
wor
k
Publ
ic P
arki
ngPa
hang
Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
OR
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an A
ND/
OR
Paha
ng S
tate
Go
vern
men
t
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
OR
Jaba
tan
Pera
ncan
gan
Band
ar d
an D
esa
Paha
ng
Road
Tra
nspo
rt O
rder
(A
lloca
tion
of C
ar P
ark)
(M
PK) 2
005
Priv
ate
Park
ing
Paha
ng S
tate
Go
vern
men
t
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
OR
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
anPr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Priv
ate
Car P
ark
By-la
w
(MPK
) 198
5
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 57
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Bus
Net
wor
k &
St
atio
nsSu
ruha
njay
a Pe
ngan
gkut
an A
wam
Dar
at (S
PAD)
AND/
OR
ECER
DC
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
Paha
ng
Stat
e Go
vern
men
t
Suru
hanj
aya
Peng
angk
utan
Aw
am D
arat
(S
PAD)
Land
Pub
lic T
rans
port
Ac
t 201
0
Rail
Net
wor
k &
St
atio
ns
Suru
hanj
aya
Peng
angk
utan
Aw
am D
arat
(SPA
D)
Suru
hanj
aya
Peng
angk
utan
Aw
am D
arat
(SPA
D)
AND/
OR
ECER
DC
Publ
icly
ow
ned
Cor
pora
tions
KT
MB
(Ker
etap
i Tan
ah M
elay
u Be
rhad
)
Suru
hanj
aya
Peng
angk
utan
Aw
am D
arat
(SPA
D)
Publ
icly
ow
ned
Co
rpor
atio
ns
KTM
B (K
eret
api
Tana
h M
elay
u Be
rhad
)
Land
Pub
lic T
rans
port
Ac
t 201
0
Taxi
sSu
ruha
njay
a Pe
ngan
gkut
an
Awam
Dar
at (S
PAD)
Suru
hanj
aya
Peng
angk
utan
Aw
am D
arat
(SPA
D)
AND
ECER
DC
Suru
hanj
aya
Peng
angk
utan
Aw
am D
arat
(SPA
D)La
nd P
ublic
Tra
nspo
rt
Act 2
010
Oth
er L
and
Publ
ic
Tran
spor
tSu
ruha
njay
a Pe
ngan
gkut
an A
wam
Dar
at (S
PAD)
Land
Pub
lic T
rans
port
Ac
t 201
0
Airp
orts
Depa
rtm
ent o
f Civ
il Av
iatio
n
Min
istr
y of
Tra
nspo
rtM
alay
sia
Airp
orts
Hol
ding
s Be
rhad
Depa
rtm
ent o
f Civ
il Av
iatio
n
Min
istr
y of
Tra
nspo
rtCi
vil A
viat
ion
Act 1
969
Cycl
ing
Net
wor
kPa
hang
Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
anPa
hang
Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
Pede
stri
an N
etw
ork
Paha
ng S
tate
Go
vern
men
tM
ajlis
Per
band
aran
Drai
nage
&
Irri
gatio
n (F
lood
M
itiga
tion)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dra
inag
e)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent A
ND/
OR
ECER
DC
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
OR
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
Paha
ng S
tate
G
over
nmen
t
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of I
rrig
atio
n &
Dra
inag
e)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Res
ourc
es &
En
viro
nmen
t
Drai
nage
Wor
ks A
ct
1954
(198
8)
58 Annexes
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Drai
nage
&
Irri
gatio
n (L
ocal
Dr
aina
ge N
etw
ork)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
Mun
icip
al O
R Pr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
Stre
et, D
rain
age
and
Build
ing
Act 1
974
(199
4)
Stre
et, D
rain
age
and
Build
ing
By-la
w
(Com
poun
ding
Offe
nses
) (M
PK) 1
983
Loca
l Gov
ernm
ent A
ct
(197
6): (
Peni
nsul
ar)
Tow
n an
d Co
untr
y Pl
anni
ng A
ct 1
976
Uni
form
Bui
ldin
g (P
ahan
g) B
y-La
ws
1996
U
nifo
rm (P
ahan
g)
(Am
endm
ents
) By-
Law
s 20
00
Sew
erag
e
Suru
hanj
aya
Perk
hidm
atan
Ai
r Neg
ara
- SP
AN (N
atio
nal
Wat
er S
ervi
ces
Com
mis
sion
Jaba
tan
Perk
hidm
atan
Pe
mbe
ntun
gan
(Sew
erag
e Se
rvic
es
Depa
rtm
ent)
M
inis
try
of E
nerg
y,
Gree
n Te
chno
logy
&
Wat
er (K
ETTH
A)
Inda
h W
ater
Kon
sort
ium
(IW
K)
Suru
hanj
aya
Perk
hidm
atan
Ai
r Neg
ara
- SP
AN (N
atio
nal
Wat
er S
ervi
ces
Com
mis
sion
)
Inda
h W
ater
Ko
nsor
tium
(IW
K)
Sew
erag
e Se
rvic
es A
ct
1993
(Act
508
) Ac
t 654
Sur
uhan
jaya
Pe
rkhi
dmat
an A
ir
Neg
ara
Act 2
006
Solid
Was
te
(Col
lect
ion)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
Neg
ara
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id
Was
te M
anag
emen
t De
part
men
t)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Perb
adan
an P
engu
rusa
n Si
sa P
epej
al d
an
Pem
bers
ihan
Aw
am (P
PSPP
A)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an W
ellb
eing
, Hou
sing
&
Loca
l Gov
ernm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
Neg
ara
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id
Was
te M
anag
emen
t De
part
men
t)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Perb
adan
an
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
dan
Pe
mbe
rsih
an A
wam
(P
PSPP
A)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Solid
Was
te
Man
agem
ent a
nd P
ublic
Cl
eans
ing
Corp
orat
ion
Act 2
007
(Act
673
)
Tabl
e 3-
6 Co
ntin
ued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 59
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Solid
Was
te
(Dis
posa
l - P
ublic
)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an S
isa
Pepe
jal N
egar
a
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id W
aste
Man
agem
ent
Depa
rtm
ent)
M
inis
try
of U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng &
Lo
cal G
over
nmen
t
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
Jaba
tan
Alam
Se
kita
r (D
epar
tmen
t of
Envi
ronm
ent)
M
inis
try
of N
atur
al
Reso
urce
s an
d En
viro
nmen
t
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
Neg
ara
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id
Was
te M
anag
emen
t De
part
men
t)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Act 6
72 -
Solid
Was
te
and
Publ
ic C
lean
sing
M
anag
emen
t Act
200
7
(effl
uent
) Re
fuse
Col
lect
ion,
Re
mov
al a
nd D
ispo
sal
By-la
w M
PK 1
983
Colle
ctio
n, R
emov
al
and
Disp
osal
of S
olid
W
aste
By-
law
(MPK
) (a
men
dmen
t) 2
007
Guid
elin
es a
nd P
olic
ies
Rega
rdin
g So
lid W
aste
St
orag
e Sy
stem
at M
PK
(app
rove
d by
MPK
Ful
l M
eetin
g N
o. 1
/89
date
d 2
Febr
uary
198
9)
Solid
Was
te
(Dis
posa
l - P
riva
te)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
Neg
ara
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id
Was
te M
anag
emen
t De
part
men
t)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Priv
ate
Conc
essi
onai
re
Jaba
tan
Alam
Se
kita
r (D
epar
tmen
t of
Envi
ronm
ent)
M
inis
try
of N
atur
al
Reso
urce
s an
d En
viro
nmen
t
Jaba
tan
Peng
urus
an
Sisa
Pep
ejal
Neg
ara
(Nat
iona
l Sol
id
Was
te M
anag
emen
t De
part
men
t)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an
Wel
lbei
ng, H
ousi
ng
& L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Act 6
72 -
Solid
Was
te
and
Publ
ic C
lean
sing
M
anag
emen
t Act
200
7 L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
(Am
endm
ent)
Act
200
7
Wat
er
Suru
hanj
aya
Perk
hidm
atan
Ai
r Neg
ara
- SP
AN (N
atio
nal
Wat
er S
ervi
ces
Com
mis
sion
)
Jaba
tan
Beka
lan
Air
(Sew
erag
e Se
rvic
es
Depa
rtm
ent)
M
inis
try
of E
nerg
y,
Gree
n Te
chno
logy
&
Wat
er (K
ETTH
A)
Peng
urus
an A
ir P
ahan
g Be
rhad
(PAI
P)
Suru
hanj
aya
Perk
hidm
atan
Ai
r Neg
ara
- SP
AN (N
atio
nal
Wat
er S
ervi
ces
Com
mis
sion
)
Peng
urus
an A
ir
Paha
ng B
erha
d (P
AIP)
Act 6
54 –
Sur
uhan
jaya
Pe
rkhi
dmat
an A
ir
Neg
ara
Act 2
006
Act 6
55 -
Wat
er S
ervi
ce
Indu
stry
Act
200
6
60 Annexes
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Elec
tric
ity N
etw
ork
(Dis
trib
utio
n)Su
ruha
njay
a Te
naga
Tena
ga N
asio
nal
Berh
ad
Tena
ga N
asio
nal
Berh
ad O
R Pr
ivat
e De
velo
per
Tena
ga N
asio
nal
Berh
adSu
ruha
njay
a Te
naga
Tena
ga N
asio
nal
Berh
ad
Act 6
10 -
Ener
gy
Com
mis
sion
Act
200
1 Ac
t 447
- El
ectr
icity
Su
pply
Act
199
0
Tele
com
mun
icat
ions
N
etw
ork
Mal
aysi
a Co
mm
unic
atio
ns a
nd M
ultim
edia
Co
mm
issi
onPr
ivat
e Te
leco
mm
unic
atio
ns C
ompa
nies
Mal
aysi
a Co
mm
unic
atio
ns a
nd M
ultim
edia
Co
mm
issi
on
Com
mun
icat
ions
and
M
ultim
edia
Act
199
8 Co
mm
unic
atio
ns a
nd
Mul
timed
ia C
omm
issi
on
Act (
1998
)
Gas
Supp
lySu
ruha
njay
a Te
naga
Gas
Mal
aysi
a Be
rhad
( M
MC
Com
pany
)Su
ruha
njay
a Te
naga
Gas
Mal
aysi
a Be
rhad
( M
MC
Com
pany
)Ga
s Su
pply
Act
199
3
Publ
ic B
uild
ings
and
Cor
e U
rban
Ser
vice
s
Publ
ic M
arke
ts &
H
awke
rsM
ajlis
Per
band
aran
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
AND/
OR
Jaba
tan
Alam
Sek
itar
(Dep
artm
ent o
f En
viro
nmen
t)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
and
Envi
ronm
ent
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
Who
lesa
le M
arke
t By
-law
(MPK
) 200
7 Pe
tty
Trad
ers
By-la
w
(MPK
) 199
3 M
arke
t By-
law
(MPK
) 19
90
Cont
rol a
nd M
onito
ring
of
Foo
d Pr
emis
e By
-law
(M
PK) 1
983
Ope
n Sp
aces
&
Publ
ic P
arks
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
anPa
rk B
y-la
w (M
PK) 2
006
Polic
e St
atio
ns
Min
istr
y of
Hom
e Aff
airs
AN
D/O
R
Jaba
tan
Pera
ncan
g Ba
ndar
dan
Des
a
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent
Polis
Dir
aja
Mal
aysi
a
(Pol
ice
Depa
rtm
ent)
M
inis
try
of H
ome
Affai
rsM
inis
try
of H
ome
Affai
rs
Fire
Sta
tions
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent
Fire
Dep
artm
ent (
BOM
BA)
Min
istr
y of
Urb
an W
ellb
eing
, Hou
sing
and
Loc
al G
over
nmen
tFi
re S
ervi
ces
Act 1
988
(Act
341
)
Tabl
e 3-
6 Co
ntin
ued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 61
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Hos
pita
ls a
nd
Med
ical
Car
e
Min
istr
y of
Hea
lth
AND/
OR
Ja
bata
n Pe
ranc
ang
Band
ar d
an D
esa
M
inis
try
of
Urb
an W
ellb
eing
, H
ousi
ng a
nd L
ocal
Go
vern
men
t
Baha
gian
Pem
bang
unan
M
inis
try
of H
ealth
OR
Priv
ate
Hos
pita
lM
inis
try
of H
ealth
O
R Pr
ivat
e H
ospi
tal
Min
istr
y of
Hea
lth
Scho
ols
Min
istr
y of
Ed
ucat
ion
Min
istr
y of
Edu
catio
n AN
D Ja
bata
n Ke
rja
Raya
(Pub
lic W
orks
Dep
artm
ent)
Min
istr
y of
Edu
catio
n
Inst
itute
of H
ighe
r Le
arni
ngM
inis
try
of H
ighe
r Ed
ucat
ion
Min
istr
y of
Hig
her E
duca
tion
AND
Priv
ate
OR
Publ
ic E
duca
tion
Inst
itutio
n M
inis
try
of H
ighe
r Edu
catio
n
Libr
arie
sM
inis
try
of In
form
atio
n, C
omm
unic
atio
n an
d Cu
lture
Art &
Cul
tura
l Ce
nter
sM
inis
try
of In
form
atio
n, C
omm
unic
atio
n an
d Cu
lture
Hot
els
Min
istr
y of
Tou
rism
&
Cul
ture
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsM
inis
try
of T
ouri
sm &
Cul
ture
Innk
eepe
rs A
ct 1
952
Boar
ding
Hou
se
Proc
edur
e (A
men
dmen
t)
(MPK
) 198
3
Hom
es, N
urse
ries
&
Kind
erga
rden
s
Min
istr
y of
W
omen
, Fam
ily
& C
omm
unity
De
velo
pmen
t
Wel
fare
Dep
artm
ent
Min
istr
y of
W
omen
, Fam
ily
& C
omm
unity
De
velo
pmen
t
Priv
ate
Busi
ness
Ow
ner
Wel
fare
Dep
artm
ent
Min
istr
y of
W
omen
, Fam
ily
& C
omm
unity
De
velo
pmen
t
Min
istr
y of
W
omen
, Fam
ily
& C
omm
unity
De
velo
pmen
t
Act 3
08 C
HIL
D CA
RE
CEN
TRE
ACT
1984
Com
mun
ity
Cent
ers
(Inc
ludi
ng
Spor
ts F
acili
ties,
M
ultip
urpo
se H
alls
, et
c)
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
Publ
ic H
ousi
ng-P
PR
(Fun
ded
Fede
ral)
Jaba
tan
Peru
mah
an N
egar
aM
ajlis
Per
band
aran
Publ
ic H
ousi
ng -
PPR
(Sta
te)
Jaba
tan
Peru
mah
an
Neg
ara
Hou
sing
Div
isio
n Pa
hang
Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent
SPN
B AN
D/O
R Pr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
JMB
Hou
sing
Div
isio
n Pa
hang
Sta
te
Gove
rnm
ent
Adve
rtis
emen
tsM
ajlis
Per
band
aran
Priv
ate
Com
pani
esM
ajlis
Per
band
aran
Priv
ate
Com
pani
esAd
vert
isin
g By
-law
( M
PK )
1983
62 Annexes
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Traffi
c M
anag
emen
t/
Cong
estio
n Co
ntro
l an
d M
onito
ring
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
(Loc
al M
unic
ipal
) AN
D/O
R Po
lice
Dira
ja M
alay
sia
(PDR
M)
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an A
ND/
OR
Paha
ng S
tate
Gov
ernm
ent
Land
Val
uatio
ns
(Sta
te L
and)
Valu
atio
n an
d Pr
oper
ty M
anag
emen
t Dep
artm
ent (
Mun
icip
al)
Loca
l Gov
ernm
ent A
ct
171
Land
Val
uatio
ns
(Fed
eral
Lan
d)Va
luat
ion
and
Prop
erty
Ser
vice
s De
part
men
t, M
inis
try
of F
inan
ce
Build
ing
Cont
rol
Com
mer
cial
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsPr
ivat
e O
wne
rs/
JMB
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
1. S
tree
t, Dr
aina
ge A
nd
Build
ing
Act 1
974
2.
Bui
ldin
g an
d Co
mm
on
Prop
erty
(Mai
nten
ance
an
d M
anag
emen
t) A
ct
2007
[Act
663
] 3.
Build
ing
By-la
w
(Pah
ang)
199
6
(Am
endm
ent)
200
0 (A
men
dmen
t) 2
007
Resi
dent
ial
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsPr
ivat
e O
wne
rs/
JMB
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
1. S
tree
t, Dr
aina
ge A
nd
Build
ing
Act 1
974
2.
Hou
sing
Dev
elop
men
t (C
ontr
ol a
nd L
icen
sing
) 19
66 [A
ct 1
18]
3. B
uild
ing
and
Com
mon
Pr
oper
ty (M
aint
enan
ce
and
Man
agem
ent)
Act
20
07 [A
ct 6
63]
4.Bu
ildin
g By
-law
(P
ahan
g) 1
996
(A
men
dmen
t) 2
000
(Am
endm
ent)
200
7
Publ
ic B
uild
ings
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
trie
s
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent A
ND
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
1. S
tree
t, Dr
aina
ge A
nd
Build
ing
Act 1
974
2.
.Bui
ldin
g By
-law
(P
ahan
g) 1
996
(A
men
dmen
t) 2
000
(Am
endm
ent)
200
7
Tabl
e 3-
6 Co
ntin
ued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 63
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Her
itage
Bui
ldin
gs
Her
itage
Co
mm
issi
on
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs/
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
try
Her
itage
Co
mm
issi
on
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
Her
itage
Co
mm
issi
on
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
Nat
iona
l Her
itage
Act
20
05
No
Fly
Zone
s (B
uild
ing
Hei
ghts
)
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
(Dep
artm
ent o
f Av
iatio
n) A
ND
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
(Dep
artm
ent o
f Av
iatio
n)
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsM
inis
try
of T
rans
port
(Dep
artm
ent o
f Av
iatio
n) A
ND
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
Civi
l Avi
atio
n Ac
t 196
9 Ai
rpor
t Sta
ndar
ds
Dire
ctiv
e 40
1 (C
ontr
ol
And
Deno
ting
Obs
tacl
es)
Spec
ial R
eser
ves
/ Zo
nes
Cont
rol
Spec
ial E
cono
mic
Zo
ne (e
.g. E
CER
SEZ)
Min
istr
y of
Fin
ance
and
ECE
RDC
East
Coa
st E
cono
mic
Re
gion
Dev
elop
men
t Co
unci
l Act
200
8 (A
ct
688)
Her
itage
Zon
es
Her
itage
Co
mm
issi
on
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs/
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
try
Her
itage
Co
mm
issi
on
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
Her
itage
Co
mm
issi
on
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
Nat
iona
l Her
itage
Act
20
05
Rive
r Res
erve
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of I
rrig
atio
n &
Dra
inag
e)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Res
ourc
es &
En
viro
nmen
t
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
O
R Pr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
O
R M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of I
rrig
atio
n &
Dra
inag
e)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Res
ourc
es &
En
viro
nmen
t
Wat
ers
Act 1
920
(Act
41
8)
Eart
hwor
ks (M
PK)
By-L
aws
1992
Fore
st R
eser
veFo
rest
ry D
epar
tmen
t M
inis
try
of N
atur
al R
esou
rces
& E
nvir
onm
ent
Nat
iona
l For
estr
y Ac
t 19
84 (A
men
dmen
t 19
93)
Rest
rict
ed Z
ones
M
inis
try
of H
ome
Affai
rsPr
otec
ted
Area
s An
d Pr
otec
ted
Plac
es A
ct 1
959
64 Annexes
Tabl
e 3-
7: I
nsti
tuti
onal
Map
: Kot
a Ki
naba
lu, S
abah
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Zoni
ng &
Lan
d us
e
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent &
H
ousi
ng
AND
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent &
H
ousi
ng
AND
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent &
H
ousi
ng
AND
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
1. A
rtic
le 9
5D &
95E
of
the
Mal
aysi
an
Cons
titut
ion
(S
abah
doe
s no
t hav
e to
adh
ere
to p
olic
ies
dete
rmin
ed b
y th
e N
atio
nal C
ounc
il fo
r Lo
cal G
over
nmen
t &
Nat
iona
l Lan
d Co
unci
l) 2.
Loc
al G
over
nmen
t O
rdin
ance
196
1 (S
abah
No.
11
of 1
991)
3.
Tow
n an
d Co
untr
y Pl
anni
ng O
rdin
ance
(S
abah
Cap
. 141
)
Road
Net
wor
k (i
nclu
des
Stre
et L
ight
ing)
Priv
ate
Hig
hway
sM
inis
try
of W
orks
Lem
baga
Leb
uhra
ya
Mal
aysi
a Pr
ivat
e Co
nces
sion
aire
Priv
ate
Conc
essi
onai
reLe
mba
ga L
ebuh
raya
M
alay
sia
Priv
ate
Conc
essi
onai
re
Akta
231
, Ak
ta L
emba
ga
Lebu
hray
a M
alay
sia
(Per
bada
nan)
198
0
Fede
ral H
ighw
ays
/ Ro
ads
Min
istr
y of
Wor
ksJa
bata
n Ke
rja
Raya
Sa
bah
(Dep
artm
ent
of P
ublic
Wor
ks)
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya
Saba
h (D
epar
tmen
t of
Pub
lic W
orks
)
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Inf
rast
ruct
ure
Dev
elop
men
t Fe
dera
l Min
istr
y of
W
orks
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya
Saba
h (D
epar
tmen
t of
Pub
lic W
orks
)
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
In
fras
truc
ture
D
evel
opm
ent
Fede
ral M
inis
try
of
Wor
ks
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya
Saba
h (D
epar
tmen
t of
Pub
lic W
orks
)
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
In
fras
truc
ture
D
evel
opm
ent
Fede
ral M
inis
try
of
Wor
ks
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya
Saba
h (D
epar
tmen
t of
Pub
lic W
orks
)
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
In
fras
truc
ture
D
evel
opm
ent
Fede
ral M
inis
try
of
Wor
ks
Fede
ral R
oad
Act 1
959
Stat
e / M
unic
ipal
Ro
ads
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya
Saba
h (D
epar
tmen
t of
Pub
lic W
orks
)
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
In
fras
truc
ture
D
evel
opm
ent
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya
Saba
h
(Dep
artm
ent o
f Pu
blic
Wor
ks)
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya
Saba
h (D
epar
tmen
t of
Pub
lic W
orks
)
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya
Saba
h (D
epar
tmen
t of
Pub
lic W
orks
)
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent &
H
ousi
ng
AND
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya
Saba
h (D
epar
tmen
t of
Pub
lic W
orks
)
Road
Tra
nspo
rt A
ct
1987
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 65
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Tran
spor
t Net
wor
k
Publ
ic P
arki
ngDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
u
Priv
ate
Park
ing
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
OR
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs Pr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
anPr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Bus
Net
wor
k &
St
atio
ns
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
In
fras
truc
ture
De
velo
pmen
t (P
ublic
Tra
nspo
rt
Divi
sion
) AN
D Sa
bah
Com
mer
cial
Ve
hicl
e Li
cens
ing
Boar
d (P
rim
e M
inis
ter’s
De
part
men
t)
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
In
fras
truc
ture
De
velo
pmen
t (P
ublic
Tra
nspo
rt
Divi
sion
)
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Saba
h Co
mm
erci
al
Vehi
cle
Lice
nsin
g Bo
ard
(Pri
me
Min
iste
r’s
Depa
rtm
ent)
Saba
h Co
mm
erci
al
Vehi
cle
Lice
nsin
g Bo
ard
(Pri
me
Min
iste
r’s
Depa
rtm
ent)
Rail
Net
wor
k &
St
atio
ns
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
In
fras
truc
ture
D
evel
opm
ent
(Pub
lic T
rans
port
D
ivis
ion)
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya
Saba
h (D
epar
tmen
t of
Pub
lic W
orks
)
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya
Saba
h (D
epar
tmen
t of
Pub
lic W
orks
)
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya
Saba
h (D
epar
tmen
t of
Pub
lic W
orks
)
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
In
fras
truc
ture
D
evel
opm
ent
(Pub
lic T
rans
port
D
ivis
ion)
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya
Saba
h (D
epar
tmen
t of
Pub
lic W
orks
)
Taxi
s &
Tax
i Sto
p
Saba
h Co
mm
erci
al
Vehi
cle
Lice
nsin
g Bo
ard
(Pri
me
Min
iste
r’s
Depa
rtm
ent)
Saba
h Co
mm
erci
al
Vehi
cle
Lice
nsin
g Bo
ard
(Pri
me
Min
iste
r’s
Depa
rtm
ent)
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Saba
h Co
mm
erci
al
Vehi
cle
Lice
nsin
g Bo
ard
(Pri
me
Min
iste
r’s
Depa
rtm
ent)
Saba
h Co
mm
erci
al
Vehi
cle
Lice
nsin
g Bo
ard
(Pri
me
Min
iste
r’s
Depa
rtm
ent)
LPKP
Act
198
7 (A
men
dmen
t 199
8)
Oth
er L
and
Publ
ic
Tran
spor
t
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
In
fras
truc
ture
De
velo
pmen
t (P
ublic
Tra
nspo
rt
Divi
sion
) AN
D Sa
bah
Com
mer
cial
Ve
hicl
e Li
cens
ing
Boar
d (P
rim
e M
inis
ter’s
De
part
men
t)
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
In
fras
truc
ture
De
velo
pmen
t (P
ublic
Tra
nspo
rt
Divi
sion
) AN
D Sa
bah
Com
mer
cial
Ve
hicl
e Li
cens
ing
Boar
d (P
rim
e M
inis
ter’s
De
part
men
t)
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Infr
astr
uctu
re
Deve
lopm
ent (
Publ
ic
Tran
spor
t Div
isio
n)
AND
Saba
h Co
mm
erci
al
Vehi
cle
Lice
nsin
g Bo
ard
(Pri
me
Min
iste
r’s
Depa
rtm
ent)
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Infr
astr
uctu
re
Deve
lopm
ent (
Publ
ic
Tran
spor
t Div
isio
n)
AND
Saba
h Co
mm
erci
al
Vehi
cle
Lice
nsin
g Bo
ard
(Pri
me
Min
iste
r’s
Depa
rtm
ent)
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
In
fras
truc
ture
De
velo
pmen
t (P
ublic
Tra
nspo
rt
Divi
sion
) AN
D Sa
bah
Com
mer
cial
Ve
hicl
e Li
cens
ing
Boar
d (P
rim
e M
inis
ter’s
De
part
men
t)
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
In
fras
truc
ture
De
velo
pmen
t (P
ublic
Tra
nspo
rt
Divi
sion
) AN
D Sa
bah
Com
mer
cial
Ve
hicl
e Li
cens
ing
Boar
d (P
rim
e M
inis
ter’s
De
part
men
t)
66 Annexes
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Airp
orts
Depa
rtm
ent o
f Civ
il Av
iatio
n
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
Depa
rtm
ent o
f Civ
il Av
iatio
n
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
Mal
aysi
Air
port
s H
oldi
ngs
Berh
adM
alay
si A
irpo
rts
Hol
ding
s Be
rhad
Depa
rtm
ent o
f Civ
il Av
iatio
n
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
Depa
rtm
ent o
f Civ
il Av
iatio
n
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
CIVI
L AV
IATI
ON
ACT
19
69
Cycl
ing
Net
wor
kDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
u
Pede
stri
an N
etw
ork
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Drai
nage
&
Irri
gatio
n (F
lood
M
itiga
tion)
- N
on
Priv
atis
ed
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
, Sab
ah
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Ag
ricu
lture
& F
ood
Indu
stry
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
, Sab
ah
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Ag
ricu
lture
& F
ood
Indu
stry
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sa
liran
, Sab
ah
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Agr
icul
ture
& F
ood
Indu
stry
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sa
liran
, Sab
ah
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Agr
icul
ture
&
Food
Indu
stry
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
, Sab
ah
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Ag
ricu
lture
& F
ood
Indu
stry
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
, Sab
ah
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Ag
ricu
lture
& F
ood
Indu
stry
Drai
nage
&
Irri
gatio
n (L
ocal
Dr
aina
ge N
etw
ork)
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent &
H
ousi
ng
AND
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
DBKK
OR
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs
DBKK
OR
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
1. K
ota
Kina
balu
City
H
all (
DBKK
) Ena
ctm
ent
1996
2.
Loc
al G
over
nmen
t O
rdin
ance
196
1 (S
abah
No.
11
of 1
991)
3.
The
Stat
e Co
nser
vatio
n of
Env
iron
men
t En
actm
ent (
1996
)
Sew
erag
eDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
u
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
(Chi
ef M
inis
ters
De
part
men
t)
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Akta
Per
khid
mat
an
Pem
betu
ngan
199
3 (A
KTA
508)
A
CT 6
54 –
Su
ruha
njay
a Pe
rkhi
dmat
an A
ir
Neg
ara
ACT
2006
Solid
Was
te
(Col
lect
ion)
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Solid
Was
te
(Dis
posa
l - P
ublic
)De
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
u
Solid
Was
te
(Dis
posa
l - P
riva
te)
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Priv
ate
Conc
essi
onai
rePr
ivat
e Co
nces
sion
aire
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Tabl
e 3-
7 Co
ntin
ued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 67
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Wat
er
Saba
h St
ate
Wat
er
Depa
rtm
ent
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
In
fras
truc
ture
De
velo
pmen
t
Saba
h St
ate
Wat
er
Depa
rtm
ent
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
In
fras
truc
ture
De
velo
pmen
t
Saba
h St
ate
Wat
er
Depa
rtm
ent
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Infr
astr
uctu
re
Deve
lopm
ent
Saba
h St
ate
Wat
er
Depa
rtm
ent
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Infr
astr
uctu
re
Deve
lopm
ent
Saba
h St
ate
Wat
er
Depa
rtm
ent
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
In
fras
truc
ture
De
velo
pmen
t
Saba
h St
ate
Wat
er
Depa
rtm
ent
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
In
fras
truc
ture
De
velo
pmen
t
Wat
er S
uppl
y O
rdin
ance
196
1 (S
abah
No.
16
of
1961
) Sa
bah
Wat
er
Reso
urce
s En
actm
ent
1998
(Sab
ah N
o. 6
of
1998
)
Elec
tric
ity N
etw
ork
(Dis
trib
utio
n)Su
ruha
njay
a Te
naga
Saba
h El
ectr
icity
Sd
n. B
hd. (
SESB
)Sa
bah
Elec
tric
ity
Sdn.
Bhd
. (SE
SB)
Saba
h El
ectr
icity
Sd
n. B
hd. (
SESB
)Su
ruha
njay
a Te
naga
Saba
h El
ectr
icity
Sd
n. B
hd. (
SESB
)
Elec
tric
ity B
oard
O
rdin
ance
195
6 (S
abah
No.
27
of
1956
) El
ectr
icity
Ord
inan
ce
(Sab
ah C
ap. 4
0)
Tele
com
mun
icat
ions
N
etw
ork
Mal
aysi
a Co
mm
unic
atio
ns
and
Mul
timed
ia
Com
mis
sion
Mal
aysi
a Co
mm
unic
atio
ns
and
Mul
timed
ia
Com
mis
sion
Priv
ate
Tele
com
mun
icat
ions
Co
mpa
nies
Priv
ate
Tele
com
mun
icat
ions
Co
mpa
nies
Mal
aysi
a Co
mm
unic
atio
ns
and
Mul
timed
ia
Com
mis
sion
Mal
aysi
a Co
mm
unic
atio
ns
and
Mul
timed
ia
Com
mis
sion
Com
mun
icat
ions
and
M
ultim
edia
Act
199
8 Co
mm
unic
atio
ns
and
Mul
timed
ia
Com
mis
sion
Act
(1
998)
Gas
Supp
lySu
ruha
njay
a Te
naga
Gas
Mal
aysi
a Be
rhad
( M
MC
Com
pany
)
Gas
Mal
aysi
a Be
rhad
( M
MC
Com
pany
)Ga
s M
alay
sia
Berh
ad
( MM
C Co
mpa
ny)
Suru
hanj
aya
Tena
gaGa
s M
alay
sia
Berh
ad (
MM
C Co
mpa
ny)
GAS
SUPP
LY A
CT
1993
Publ
ic B
uild
ings
and
Ser
vice
s
Publ
ic M
arke
ts &
H
awke
rsDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
u
Ope
n Sp
aces
&
Publ
ic P
arks
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Polic
e St
atio
ns &
Se
rvic
esM
inis
try
of H
ome
Affai
rs
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya
(Pub
lic W
orks
De
part
men
t)
AND
Polis
Dir
aja
Mal
aysi
a
(Pol
ice
Depa
rtm
ent)
M
inis
try
of H
ome
Affai
rs
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya
(Pub
lic W
orks
De
part
men
t) A
ND
Polis
Dir
aja
Mal
aysi
a
(Pol
ice
Depa
rtm
ent)
M
inis
try
of H
ome
Affai
rs
Polis
Dir
aja
Mal
aysi
a (P
olic
e De
part
men
t)
Min
istr
y of
Hom
e Aff
airs
Min
istr
y of
Hom
e Aff
airs
Min
istr
y of
Hom
e Aff
airs
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Airp
orts
Depa
rtm
ent o
f Civ
il Av
iatio
n
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
Depa
rtm
ent o
f Civ
il Av
iatio
n
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
Mal
aysi
Air
port
s H
oldi
ngs
Berh
adM
alay
si A
irpo
rts
Hol
ding
s Be
rhad
Depa
rtm
ent o
f Civ
il Av
iatio
n
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
Depa
rtm
ent o
f Civ
il Av
iatio
n
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
CIVI
L AV
IATI
ON
ACT
19
69
Cycl
ing
Net
wor
kDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
u
Pede
stri
an N
etw
ork
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Drai
nage
&
Irri
gatio
n (F
lood
M
itiga
tion)
- N
on
Priv
atis
ed
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
, Sab
ah
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Ag
ricu
lture
& F
ood
Indu
stry
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
, Sab
ah
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Ag
ricu
lture
& F
ood
Indu
stry
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sa
liran
, Sab
ah
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Agr
icul
ture
& F
ood
Indu
stry
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sa
liran
, Sab
ah
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Agr
icul
ture
&
Food
Indu
stry
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
, Sab
ah
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Ag
ricu
lture
& F
ood
Indu
stry
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
, Sab
ah
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Ag
ricu
lture
& F
ood
Indu
stry
Drai
nage
&
Irri
gatio
n (L
ocal
Dr
aina
ge N
etw
ork)
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent &
H
ousi
ng
AND
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
DBKK
OR
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs
DBKK
OR
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
1. K
ota
Kina
balu
City
H
all (
DBKK
) Ena
ctm
ent
1996
2.
Loc
al G
over
nmen
t O
rdin
ance
196
1 (S
abah
No.
11
of 1
991)
3.
The
Stat
e Co
nser
vatio
n of
Env
iron
men
t En
actm
ent (
1996
)
Sew
erag
eDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
u
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
(Chi
ef M
inis
ters
De
part
men
t)
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Akta
Per
khid
mat
an
Pem
betu
ngan
199
3 (A
KTA
508)
A
CT 6
54 –
Su
ruha
njay
a Pe
rkhi
dmat
an A
ir
Neg
ara
ACT
2006
Solid
Was
te
(Col
lect
ion)
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Solid
Was
te
(Dis
posa
l - P
ublic
)De
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
u
Solid
Was
te
(Dis
posa
l - P
riva
te)
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Priv
ate
Conc
essi
onai
rePr
ivat
e Co
nces
sion
aire
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
68 Annexes
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Fire
Sta
tions
&
Serv
ices
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent
Fire
Dep
artm
ent
(BO
MBA
) M
inis
try
of
Urb
an W
ellb
eing
, H
ousi
ng a
nd L
ocal
G
over
nmen
t
Fire
Dep
artm
ent
(BO
MBA
) M
inis
try
of
Urb
an W
ellb
eing
, H
ousi
ng a
nd L
ocal
G
over
nmen
t
Fire
Dep
artm
ent
(BO
MBA
) M
inis
try
of
Urb
an W
ellb
eing
, H
ousi
ng a
nd L
ocal
G
over
nmen
t
Fire
Dep
artm
ent
(BO
MBA
) M
inis
try
of
Urb
an W
ellb
eing
, H
ousi
ng a
nd L
ocal
G
over
nmen
t
Fire
Dep
artm
ent
(BO
MBA
) M
inis
try
of
Urb
an W
ellb
eing
, H
ousi
ng a
nd L
ocal
G
over
nmen
t
Fire
Ser
vice
s Ac
t 198
8 (A
ct 3
41)
Hos
pita
ls a
nd
Med
ical
Car
e
Min
istr
y of
Hea
lth
AND/
OR
Sa
bah
Stat
e M
inis
try
of L
ocal
Go
vern
men
t &
Hou
sing
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya
(Pub
lic W
orks
De
part
men
t)
AND
Baha
gian
Pe
mba
ngun
an
Min
istr
y of
Hea
lth
OR
Priv
ate
Hos
pita
l
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya
(Pub
lic W
orks
De
part
men
t)
AND
Baha
gian
Pe
mba
ngun
an
Min
istr
y of
Hea
lth
OR
Priv
ate
Hos
pita
l
Min
istr
y of
Hea
lth
OR
Priv
ate
Hos
pita
lM
inis
try
of H
ealth
M
inis
try
of H
ealth
Scho
ols
Min
istr
y of
Ed
ucat
ion
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya
(Pub
lic W
orks
De
part
men
t)
AND
Min
istr
y of
Ed
ucat
ion
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya
(Pub
lic W
orks
De
part
men
t) A
ND
Min
istr
y of
Edu
catio
n
Min
istr
y of
Ed
ucat
ion
Min
istr
y of
Ed
ucat
ion
Inst
itute
of H
ighe
r Le
arni
ngM
inis
try
of H
ighe
r Ed
ucat
ion
Priv
ate
OR
Publ
ic E
duca
tion
Inst
itutio
n A
ND
Min
istr
y of
Hig
her
Educ
atio
n
Priv
ate
OR
Publ
ic
Educ
atio
n In
stitu
tion
AND
Min
istr
y of
H
ighe
r Edu
catio
n
Priv
ate
OR
Publ
ic E
duca
tion
Inst
itutio
n A
ND
Min
istr
y of
Hig
her
Educ
atio
n
Min
istr
y of
Hig
her
Educ
atio
nM
inis
try
of H
ighe
r Ed
ucat
ion
Libr
arie
s
Min
istr
y of
In
form
atio
n,
Com
mun
icat
ion
and
Cultu
re
Min
istr
y of
In
form
atio
n,
Com
mun
icat
ion
and
Cultu
re
Min
istr
y of
In
form
atio
n,
Com
mun
icat
ion
and
Cultu
re
Min
istr
y of
In
form
atio
n,
Com
mun
icat
ion
and
Cultu
re
Min
istr
y of
In
form
atio
n,
Com
mun
icat
ion
and
Cultu
re
Min
istr
y of
In
form
atio
n,
Com
mun
icat
ion
and
Cultu
re
Art &
Cul
tura
l Ce
nter
s
Min
istr
y of
In
form
atio
n,
Com
mun
icat
ion
and
Cultu
re
Min
istr
y of
In
form
atio
n,
Com
mun
icat
ion
and
Cultu
re
Min
istr
y of
In
form
atio
n,
Com
mun
icat
ion
and
Cultu
re
Min
istr
y of
In
form
atio
n,
Com
mun
icat
ion
and
Cultu
re
Min
istr
y of
In
form
atio
n,
Com
mun
icat
ion
and
Cultu
re
Min
istr
y of
Info
rmat
ion,
Com
mun
icat
ion
and
Cultu
re
Hot
els
Saba
h M
inis
try
of
Tour
ism
, Cul
ture
an
d En
viro
nmen
t Sa
bah
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsPr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs
Saba
h M
inis
try
of
Tour
ism
, Cul
ture
an
d En
viro
nmen
t Sa
bah
Saba
h M
inis
try
of
Tour
ism
, Cul
ture
an
d En
viro
nmen
t Sa
bah
Hom
es, N
urse
ries
&
Kind
erga
rden
s
Min
istr
y of
W
omen
, Fam
ily
& C
omm
unit
y D
evel
opm
ent
Priv
ate
Busi
ness
O
wne
rPr
ivat
e Bu
sine
ss
Ow
ner
Priv
ate
Busi
ness
O
wne
r
Wel
fare
Dep
artm
ent
Min
istr
y of
W
omen
, Fam
ily
& C
omm
unit
y D
evel
opm
ent
Min
istr
y of
W
omen
, Fam
ily
& C
omm
unity
De
velo
pmen
t
Act 3
08 C
HIL
D CA
RE
CEN
TRE
ACT
1984
Tabl
e 3-
7 Co
ntin
ued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 69
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Com
mun
ity
Cent
ers
(Inc
ludi
ng
Spor
ts F
acili
ties,
M
ultip
urpo
se H
alls
, et
c)
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Publ
ic H
ousi
ng-P
PR
(Fun
ded
Fede
ral)
Jaba
tan
Peru
mah
an
Neg
ara
Jaba
tan
Peru
mah
an
Neg
ara
Jaba
tan
Peru
mah
an
Neg
ara
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
anM
ajlis
Per
band
aran
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
Publ
ic H
ousi
ng-P
PR
( Sta
te)
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent &
H
ousi
ng
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent &
H
ousi
ng
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Loc
al G
over
nmen
t &
Hou
sing
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Loc
al G
over
nmen
t &
Hou
sing
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent &
H
ousi
ng
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent &
H
ousi
ng
Adve
rtis
emen
tsDe
wan
Ban
dara
ya
Kota
Kin
abal
uPr
ivat
e Co
mpa
nies
Priv
ate
Com
pani
esPr
ivat
e Co
mpa
nies
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Priv
ate
Com
pani
es K
ota
Kina
balu
City
H
all (
Adve
rtis
emen
t)
By-la
ws
1983
Traffi
c M
anag
emen
t/
Cong
estio
n Co
ntro
l an
d M
onito
ring
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
AND
/OR
Polic
e Di
raja
Mal
aysi
a (P
DRM
)
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
AND
/OR
Polic
e Di
raja
Mal
aysi
a (P
DRM
)
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
AND
/O
R Po
lice
Dira
ja
Mal
aysi
a (P
DRM
)
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
AND
/O
R Po
lice
Dira
ja
Mal
aysi
a (P
DRM
)
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
AND
/OR
Polic
e Di
raja
Mal
aysi
a (P
DRM
)
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
AND
/OR
Polic
e Di
raja
Mal
aysi
a (P
DRM
)
Land
Val
uatio
ns
(Sta
te L
and)
Valu
atio
n an
d Pr
oper
ty
Man
agem
ent
Depa
rtm
ent
(Mun
icip
al)
Valu
atio
n an
d Pr
oper
ty
Man
agem
ent
Depa
rtm
ent
(Mun
icip
al)
Valu
atio
n an
d Pr
oper
ty
Man
agem
ent
Depa
rtm
ent
(Mun
icip
al)
Valu
atio
n an
d Pr
oper
ty
Man
agem
ent
Depa
rtm
ent
(Mun
icip
al)
Valu
atio
n an
d Pr
oper
ty
Man
agem
ent
Depa
rtm
ent
(Mun
icip
al)
Valu
atio
n an
d Pr
oper
ty
Man
agem
ent
Depa
rtm
ent
(Mun
icip
al)
Loca
l Gov
ernm
ent
Act 1
71
70 Annexes
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Build
ing
Cont
rol
Com
mer
cial
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent &
H
ousi
ng
AND
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsPr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Priv
ate
Ow
ners
/ JM
B
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent &
H
ousi
ng
AND
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
2. L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Ord
inan
ce 1
961
(Sab
ah N
o. 1
1 of
199
1)
3. T
own
and
Coun
try
Plan
ning
Ord
inan
ce
(Sab
ah C
ap. 1
41)
Resi
dent
ial
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent &
H
ousi
ng
AND
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsPr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Priv
ate
Ow
ners
/ JM
B
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent &
H
ousi
ng
AND
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
2. L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Ord
inan
ce 1
961
(Sab
ah N
o. 1
1 of
199
1)
3. T
own
and
Coun
try
Plan
ning
Ord
inan
ce
(Sab
ah C
ap. 1
41)
Publ
ic B
uild
ings
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent &
H
ousi
ng
AND
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
trie
sRe
spec
tive
Min
istr
ies
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
trie
s
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent &
H
ousi
ng
AND
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
Dew
an B
anda
raya
Ko
ta K
inab
alu
2. L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
Ord
inan
ce 1
961
(Sab
ah N
o. 1
1 of
199
1)
3. T
own
and
Coun
try
Plan
ning
Ord
inan
ce
(Sab
ah C
ap. 1
41)
Her
itage
Bui
ldin
gs
Her
itage
Co
mm
issi
on
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs/
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
try
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs/
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
try
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs/
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
try
Her
itage
Co
mm
issi
on
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Her
itage
Co
mm
issi
on
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Nat
iona
l Her
itage
Act
20
05
No
Fly
Zone
s (B
uild
ing
Hei
ghts
)
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
(Dep
artm
ent o
f Av
iati
on) A
ND
M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
(Dep
artm
ent o
f Av
iati
on)
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsPr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
(Dep
artm
ent o
f Av
iatio
n) A
ND
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
(Mun
icip
al)
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
(Dep
artm
ent o
f Av
iatio
n) A
ND
Maj
lis P
erba
ndar
an
(Mun
icip
al)
Tabl
e 3-
7 Co
ntin
ued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 71
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Spec
ial R
eser
ves
/ Zo
nes
Cont
rol
SEDI
AM
inis
try
of F
inan
ce
AND
SEDI
AM
inis
try
of F
inan
ce
AND
SEDI
AM
inis
try
of F
inan
ce
AND
SEDI
AM
inis
try
of F
inan
ce
AND
SEDI
AM
inis
try
of F
inan
ce
AND
SEDI
AM
inis
try
of F
inan
ce
AND
SEDI
A
Her
itage
Zon
es
Her
itage
Co
mm
issi
on
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs/
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
try
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs/
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
try
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs/
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
try
Her
itage
Co
mm
issi
on
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Her
itage
Co
mm
issi
on
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Nat
iona
l Her
itage
Act
20
05
Rive
r Res
erve
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
, Sab
ah
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Ag
ricu
lture
& F
ood
Indu
stry
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
, Sab
ah
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Ag
ricu
lture
& F
ood
Indu
stry
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sa
liran
, Sab
ah
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Agr
icul
ture
& F
ood
Indu
stry
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sa
liran
, Sab
ah
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Agr
icul
ture
&
Food
Indu
stry
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
, Sab
ah
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Ag
ricu
lture
& F
ood
Indu
stry
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
, Sab
ah
Saba
h St
ate
Min
istr
y of
Ag
ricu
lture
& F
ood
Indu
stry
Cons
erva
tion
of E
nvir
onm
ent
Enac
tmen
t 199
6 (S
abah
No.
14
of
1996
)
Fore
st R
eser
ve
Fore
stry
De
part
men
t Sa
bah
Chie
f M
inis
ter
Dep
artm
ent
Fore
stry
De
part
men
t Sa
bah
Chie
f M
inis
ter
Dep
artm
ent
Fore
stry
Dep
artm
ent
Saba
h Ch
ief M
inis
ter
Dep
artm
ent
Fore
stry
Dep
artm
ent
Saba
h Ch
ief
Min
iste
r D
epar
tmen
t
Fore
stry
De
part
men
t Sa
bah
Chie
f M
inis
ter
Dep
artm
ent
Fore
stry
De
part
men
t Sa
bah
Chie
f M
inis
ter
Dep
artm
ent
Fore
st E
nact
men
t 19
68 (S
abah
No.
2 o
f 19
68)
Fore
st (C
onst
itutio
n of
For
est R
eser
ve
and
Amen
dmen
t)
Enac
tmen
t 198
4 (S
abah
N
o. 4
of 1
984)
Rest
rict
ed Z
ones
M
inis
try
of H
ome
Affai
rsM
inis
try
of H
ome
Affai
rsM
inis
try
of H
ome
Affai
rsM
inis
try
of H
ome
Affai
rsM
inis
try
of H
ome
Affai
rsM
inis
try
of H
ome
Affai
rs
Prot
ecte
d Ar
eas
and
Prot
ecte
d Pl
aces
Act
195
9
72 Annexes
Tabl
e 3-
8: I
nsti
tuti
onal
Map
: Kuc
hing
, Sar
awak
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Zoni
ng &
Lan
d us
e
Sara
wak
Min
istr
y of
Re
sour
ce P
lann
ing
and
Envi
ronm
ent
AND
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
ilM
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il
Sara
wak
Min
istr
y of
Re
sour
ce P
lann
ing
and
Envi
ronm
ent
AND
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il
Sara
wak
Min
istr
y of
Re
sour
ce P
lann
ing
and
Envi
ronm
ent
AND
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il
Artic
le 9
5D &
95E
of
the
Mal
aysi
an
Cons
titut
ion
(S
araw
ak d
oes
not
have
to a
dher
e to
po
licie
s de
term
ined
by
the
Nat
iona
l Cou
ncil
for L
ocal
Gov
ernm
ent
& N
atio
nal L
and
Coun
cil)
Sara
wak
Lan
d Co
de,
1958
To
wn
and
Coun
try
Plan
ning
Sar
awak
Ca
p 87
Road
Net
wor
k (i
nclu
des
Stre
et L
ight
ing)
Priv
ate
Hig
hway
sM
inis
try
of W
orks
Mal
aysi
an H
ighw
ay
Auth
ority
(Lem
baga
Le
buhr
aya
Mal
aysi
a)
Priv
ate
Conc
essi
onai
rePr
ivat
e Co
nces
sion
aire
Lem
baga
Leb
uhra
ya
Mal
aysi
a Pr
ivat
e Co
nces
sion
aire
Hig
hway
Aut
hori
ty
Mal
aysi
a (I
ncor
pora
tion)
Act
19
80
Fede
ral H
ighw
ays
/ Ro
ads
Min
istr
y of
Wor
ks
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya (D
epar
tmen
t of
Pub
lic W
orks
) Sa
raw
ak
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya (D
epar
tmen
t of
Pub
lic W
orks
) Sa
raw
ak
Fede
ral M
inis
try
of
Wor
ks
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya (D
epar
tmen
t of
Pub
lic W
orks
) Sa
raw
ak
Fede
ral M
inis
try
of
Wor
ks
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya (D
epar
tmen
t of
Pub
lic W
orks
) Sa
raw
ak
Fede
ral M
inis
try
of
Wor
ks
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya (D
epar
tmen
t of
Pub
lic W
orks
) Sa
raw
ak
Fede
ral M
inis
try
of
Wor
ks
Fede
ral R
oad
Act 1
959
Stat
e Ro
ads
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya (D
epar
tmen
t of
Pub
lic W
orks
) Sa
raw
ak
Sara
wak
Min
istr
y of
Infr
astr
uctu
re
Deve
lopm
ent a
nd
Com
mun
icat
ions
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya (D
epar
tmen
t of
Pub
lic W
orks
) Sa
raw
ak
Publ
ic W
orks
De
part
men
t Sar
awak
AN
D/O
R Pr
ivat
e Co
nces
sion
aire
s
Publ
ic W
orks
De
part
men
t Sar
awak
AN
D/O
R Pr
ivat
e Co
nces
sion
aire
s
Min
istr
y of
In
fras
truc
ture
De
velo
pmen
t and
Co
mm
unic
atio
ns
Sara
wak
AN
D M
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya (D
epar
tmen
t of
Pub
lic W
orks
) Sa
raw
ak
Stat
e Ro
ads
Ord
inan
ce
1994
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 73
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Tran
spor
t Net
wor
k
Publ
ic P
arki
ngM
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
ilM
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
ilM
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
ilLo
cal A
utho
ritie
s O
rdin
ance
199
6
Priv
ate
Park
ing
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
ilM
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
OR
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsPr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsM
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsLo
cal A
utho
ritie
s O
rdin
ance
199
6
Bus
Net
wor
k &
St
atio
ns
Sara
wak
Min
istr
y of
Infr
astr
uctu
re
Deve
lopm
ent a
nd
Com
mun
icat
ions
Sa
raw
ak A
ND
Sara
wak
Co
mm
erci
al V
ehic
le
Lice
nsin
g Bo
ard
(Pri
me
Min
iste
r’s
Depa
rtm
ent)
Sara
wak
Min
istr
y of
Infr
astr
uctu
re
Deve
lopm
ent a
nd
Com
mun
icat
ions
Sa
raw
ak A
ND
Sara
wak
Co
mm
erci
al V
ehic
le
Lice
nsin
g Bo
ard
(Pri
me
Min
iste
r’s
Depa
rtm
ent)
AN
D M
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il
Sara
wak
Co
mm
erci
al V
ehic
le
Lice
nsin
g Bo
ard
(Pri
me
Min
iste
r’s
Depa
rtm
ent)
AN
D M
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Sara
wak
Co
mm
erci
al V
ehic
le
Lice
nsin
g Bo
ard
(Pri
me
Min
iste
r’s
Depa
rtm
ent)
Sara
wak
Co
mm
erci
al V
ehic
le
Lice
nsin
g Bo
ard
(Pri
me
Min
iste
r’s
Depa
rtm
ent)
AN
D M
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Loca
l Aut
hori
ties
Ord
inan
ce 1
996
Com
mer
cial
Veh
icle
s Li
cens
ing
Boar
d Ac
t 19
87
Rail
Net
wor
k &
St
atio
ns
Sara
wak
Min
istr
y of
Infr
astr
uctu
re
Deve
lopm
ent a
nd
Com
mun
icat
ions
Sa
raw
ak
N/A
N/A
N/A
Sara
wak
Min
istr
y of
Infr
astr
uctu
re
Deve
lopm
ent a
nd
Com
mun
icat
ions
Sa
raw
ak
N/A
Taxi
s &
Tax
i Sto
p
Sara
wak
Min
istr
y of
Infr
astr
uctu
re
Deve
lopm
ent a
nd
Com
mun
icat
ions
Sa
raw
ak A
ND
Sara
wak
Co
mm
erci
al V
ehic
le
Lice
nsin
g Bo
ard
(Pri
me
Min
iste
r’s
Depa
rtm
ent)
Sara
wak
Min
istr
y of
Infr
astr
uctu
re
Deve
lopm
ent a
nd
Com
mun
icat
ions
Sa
raw
ak A
ND
Sara
wak
Co
mm
erci
al V
ehic
le
Lice
nsin
g Bo
ard
(Pri
me
Min
iste
r’s
Depa
rtm
ent)
AN
D M
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il
Sara
wak
Co
mm
erci
al V
ehic
le
Lice
nsin
g Bo
ard
(Pri
me
Min
iste
r’s
Depa
rtm
ent)
AN
D M
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Sara
wak
Co
mm
erci
al V
ehic
le
Lice
nsin
g Bo
ard
(Pri
me
Min
iste
r’s
Depa
rtm
ent)
Sara
wak
Co
mm
erci
al V
ehic
le
Lice
nsin
g Bo
ard
(Pri
me
Min
iste
r’s
Depa
rtm
ent)
AN
D M
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Loca
l Aut
hori
ties
Ord
inan
ce 1
996
Com
mer
cial
Veh
icle
s Li
cens
ing
Boar
d Ac
t 19
87
74 Annexes
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Oth
er L
and
Publ
ic
Tran
spor
t
Sara
wak
Min
istr
y of
Infr
astr
uctu
re
Deve
lopm
ent a
nd
Com
mun
icat
ions
Sa
raw
ak A
ND
Sara
wak
Co
mm
erci
al V
ehic
le
Lice
nsin
g Bo
ard
(Pri
me
Min
iste
r’s
Depa
rtm
ent)
Sara
wak
Min
istr
y of
Infr
astr
uctu
re
Deve
lopm
ent a
nd
Com
mun
icat
ions
Sa
raw
ak A
ND
Sara
wak
Co
mm
erci
al V
ehic
le
Lice
nsin
g Bo
ard
(Pri
me
Min
iste
r’s
Depa
rtm
ent)
AN
D M
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Sara
wak
Min
istr
y of
Infr
astr
uctu
re
Deve
lopm
ent a
nd
Com
mun
icat
ions
Sa
raw
ak A
ND
Sara
wak
Co
mm
erci
al V
ehic
le
Lice
nsin
g Bo
ard
(Pri
me
Min
iste
r’s
Depa
rtm
ent)
AN
D M
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Sara
wak
Min
istr
y of
Infr
astr
uctu
re
Deve
lopm
ent a
nd
Com
mun
icat
ions
Sa
raw
ak A
ND
Sara
wak
Co
mm
erci
al V
ehic
le
Lice
nsin
g Bo
ard
(Pri
me
Min
iste
r’s
Depa
rtm
ent)
AN
D M
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Sara
wak
Min
istr
y of
Infr
astr
uctu
re
Deve
lopm
ent a
nd
Com
mun
icat
ions
Sa
raw
ak A
ND
Sara
wak
Co
mm
erci
al V
ehic
le
Lice
nsin
g Bo
ard
(Pri
me
Min
iste
r’s
Depa
rtm
ent)
Sara
wak
Min
istr
y of
Infr
astr
uctu
re
Deve
lopm
ent a
nd
Com
mun
icat
ions
Sa
raw
ak A
ND
Sara
wak
Co
mm
erci
al V
ehic
le
Lice
nsin
g Bo
ard
(Pri
me
Min
iste
r’s
Depa
rtm
ent)
Loca
l Aut
hori
ties
Ord
inan
ce 1
996
Com
mer
cial
Veh
icle
s Li
cens
ing
Boar
d Ac
t 19
87
Airp
orts
Depa
rtm
ent o
f Civ
il Av
iatio
n
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
Depa
rtm
ent o
f Civ
il Av
iatio
n
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
Mal
aysi
a Ai
rpor
ts
Hol
ding
s Be
rhad
Mal
aysi
a Ai
rpor
ts
Hol
ding
s Be
rhad
Depa
rtm
ent o
f Civ
il Av
iatio
n
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
Depa
rtm
ent o
f Civ
il Av
iatio
n
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
Civi
l Avi
atio
n Ac
t 196
9
Cycl
ing
Net
wor
kM
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
ilM
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
ilM
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il
Pede
stri
an N
etw
ork
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
ilM
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
ilM
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
ilM
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Drai
nage
&
Irri
gatio
n (F
lood
M
itiga
tion)
- N
on
Priv
atis
ed
Sara
wak
Min
istr
y of
N
atur
al R
esou
rces
&
Env
iron
men
t
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Sara
wak
Min
istr
y of
N
atur
al R
esou
rces
&
Env
iron
men
t
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sa
liran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sa
liran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
Drai
nage
Wor
ks
Ord
inan
ce 1
966
Drai
nage
&
Irri
gatio
n (L
ocal
Dr
aina
ge N
etw
ork)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il O
R Pr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il O
R Pr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
ilM
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il
Loca
l Aut
hori
ties
Ord
inan
ce 1
996
Drai
nage
Wor
ks
Ord
inan
ce S
araw
ak
1966
Sew
erag
eSe
wer
age
Serv
ices
De
part
men
t Sa
raw
ak
Sew
erag
e Se
rvic
es
Depa
rtm
ent
Sara
wak
Sew
erag
e Se
rvic
es
Depa
rtm
ent S
araw
ak
Sew
erag
e Se
rvic
es
Depa
rtm
ent S
araw
ak
AND/
OR
Pr
ivat
e M
anag
emen
t Ag
ency
Sew
erag
e Se
rvic
es
Depa
rtm
ent
Sara
wak
Sew
erag
e Se
rvic
es
Depa
rtm
ent
Sara
wak
Loca
l Aut
hori
ties
Ord
inan
ce 1
996
Sew
erag
e Sy
stem
s an
d Se
rvic
es O
rdin
ance
, 20
05
Tabl
e 3-
8 Co
ntin
ued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 75
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Solid
Was
te
(Col
lect
ion)
Nat
ural
Res
ourc
es
and
Envi
ronm
ent
Boar
d AN
D
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il
Nat
ural
Res
ourc
es
and
Envi
ronm
ent
Boar
d
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il AN
D Sa
raw
ak W
aste
s M
anag
emen
t Sdn
Bh
d
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il AN
D Sa
raw
ak W
aste
s M
anag
emen
t Sdn
Bh
d
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
ilM
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Envi
ronm
enta
l Qua
lity
Act 1
974
Loca
l Aut
hori
ties
Ord
inan
ce 1
996
Nat
ural
Res
ourc
es
and
Envi
ronm
ent
Ord
inan
ce
(Am
endm
ent)
200
1
Solid
Was
te
(Dis
posa
l - P
ublic
)
Nat
ural
Res
ourc
es
and
Envi
ronm
ent
Boar
d AN
D
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il
Nat
ural
Res
ourc
es
and
Envi
ronm
ent
Boar
d
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il AN
D Sa
raw
ak W
aste
s M
anag
emen
t Sdn
Bh
d
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il AN
D Sa
raw
ak W
aste
s M
anag
emen
t Sdn
Bh
d
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
ilM
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Envi
ronm
enta
l Qua
lity
Act 1
974
Loca
l Aut
hori
ties
Ord
inan
ce 1
996
Nat
ural
Res
ourc
es
and
Envi
ronm
ent
Ord
inan
ce
(Am
endm
ent)
200
1
Solid
Was
te
(Dis
posa
l - P
riva
te)
Nat
ural
Res
ourc
es
and
Envi
ronm
ent
Boar
d AN
D
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il
Nat
ural
Res
ourc
es
and
Envi
ronm
ent
Boar
d
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il AN
D Sa
raw
ak W
aste
s M
anag
emen
t Sdn
Bh
d
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il AN
D Sa
raw
ak W
aste
s M
anag
emen
t Sdn
Bh
d
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
ilM
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Envi
ronm
enta
l Qua
lity
Act 1
974
Loca
l Aut
hori
ties
Ord
inan
ce 1
996
Nat
ural
Res
ourc
es
and
Envi
ronm
ent
Ord
inan
ce
(Am
endm
ent)
200
1
Wat
er
Sara
wak
Sta
te
Wat
er R
esou
rces
Co
unci
l AN
D
Min
istr
y of
Pub
lic
Util
ities
Kuch
ing
Wat
er
Boar
dKu
chin
g W
ater
Boa
rdKu
chin
g W
ater
Bo
ard
Sara
wak
Sta
te
Wat
er R
esou
rces
Co
unci
l AN
D
Min
istr
y of
Pub
lic
Util
ities
Kuch
ing
Wat
er
Boar
d
Wat
ers
Act 1
920
(Act
41
8)
Sara
wak
Wat
er
Ord
inan
ce 1
994
Elec
tric
ity N
etw
ork
(Dis
trib
utio
n)
Elec
tric
al
Insp
ecto
rate
Uni
t M
inis
try
of P
ublic
U
tiliti
es S
araw
ak
Sara
wak
Ene
rgy
Berh
adSa
raw
ak E
nerg
y Be
rhad
Sara
wak
Ene
rgy
Berh
ad
Elec
tric
al
Insp
ecto
rate
Uni
t M
inis
try
of P
ublic
U
tiliti
es S
araw
ak
Sara
wak
Ene
rgy
Berh
ad
Elec
tric
ity O
rdin
ance
, Ch
apte
r 50
(Rev
ised
20
03)
Elec
tric
ity R
ules
, 199
9 El
ectr
icity
(Sta
te G
rid
Code
) Rul
es, 2
003
Tele
com
mun
icat
ions
N
etw
ork
Mal
aysi
a Co
mm
unic
atio
ns
and
Mul
timed
ia
Com
mis
sion
Mal
aysi
a Co
mm
unic
atio
ns
and
Mul
timed
ia
Com
mis
sion
Priv
ate
Tele
com
mun
icat
ions
Co
mpa
nies
Priv
ate
Tele
com
mun
icat
ions
Co
mpa
nies
Mal
aysi
a Co
mm
unic
atio
ns
and
Mul
timed
ia
Com
mis
sion
Mal
aysi
a Co
mm
unic
atio
ns
and
Mul
timed
ia
Com
mis
sion
Com
mun
icat
ions
and
M
ultim
edia
Act
199
8 Co
mm
unic
atio
ns
and
Mul
timed
ia
Com
mis
sion
Act
(1
998)
76 Annexes
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Gas
Supp
lyM
inis
try
of P
ublic
U
tiliti
esSa
raw
ak E
nerg
y Be
rhad
Sara
wak
Ene
rgy
Berh
adSa
raw
ak E
nerg
y Be
rhad
Min
istr
y of
Pub
lic
Util
ities
Sara
wak
Gas
Di
stri
butio
n Sd
n Bh
d
Gas
Supp
ly A
ct 1
993
Sara
wak
Gas
Sup
ply
Serv
ices
(Ope
ratin
g Co
mpa
ny) O
rdin
ance
19
95
Publ
ic B
uild
ings
and
Ser
vice
s
Publ
ic M
arke
ts &
H
awke
rsM
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
ilM
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
ilM
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
ilLo
cal A
utho
ritie
s O
rdin
ance
199
6
Ope
n Sp
aces
&
Publ
ic P
arks
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
ilM
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
ilM
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
ilM
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Loca
l Aut
hori
ties
Ord
inan
ce 1
996
Polic
e St
atio
ns &
Se
rvic
esM
inis
try
of H
ome
Affai
rs
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya
(Pub
lic W
orks
De
part
men
t)
Polis
Dir
aja
Mal
aysi
a
(Pol
ice
Depa
rtm
ent)
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya
(Pub
lic W
orks
De
part
men
t) A
ND
Polis
Dir
aja
Mal
aysi
a (P
olic
e De
part
men
t)
Min
istr
y of
Hom
e Aff
airs
Polis
Dir
aja
Mal
aysi
a (P
olic
e De
part
men
t)
Min
istr
y of
Hom
e Aff
airs
Min
istr
y of
Hom
e Aff
airs
Min
istr
y of
Hom
e Aff
airs
Fire
Sta
tions
&
Serv
ices
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent
Fire
Ser
vice
s De
part
men
t (B
OM
BA)
Min
istr
y of
U
rban
Wel
lbei
ng,
Hou
sing
and
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent
Fire
Dep
artm
ent
(BO
MBA
) M
inis
try
of
Urb
an W
ellb
eing
, H
ousi
ng a
nd L
ocal
Go
vern
men
t
Fire
Dep
artm
ent
(BO
MBA
) M
inis
try
of
Urb
an W
ellb
eing
, H
ousi
ng a
nd L
ocal
Go
vern
men
t
Fire
Dep
artm
ent
(BO
MBA
) M
inis
try
of
Urb
an W
ellb
eing
, H
ousi
ng a
nd L
ocal
Go
vern
men
t
Fire
Dep
artm
ent
(BO
MBA
) M
inis
try
of
Urb
an W
ellb
eing
, H
ousi
ng a
nd L
ocal
Go
vern
men
t
Fire
Ser
vice
s Ac
t 198
8
Tabl
e 3-
8 Co
ntin
ued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 77
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Hos
pita
ls a
nd
Med
ical
Car
e
Min
istr
y of
Hea
lth
AND/
OR
Pl
anni
ng D
ivis
ion
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
Sara
wak
M
inis
try
of
Urb
an W
ellb
eing
, H
ousi
ng a
nd L
ocal
Go
vern
men
t
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya
(Pub
lic W
orks
De
part
men
t) A
ND
Ba
hagi
an
Pem
bang
unan
M
inis
try
of H
ealth
O
R Pr
ivat
e H
ospi
tal
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya
(Pub
lic W
orks
De
part
men
t)
AND
Baha
gian
Pe
mba
ngun
an
Min
istr
y of
Hea
lth
OR
Priv
ate
Hos
pita
l
Min
istr
y of
Hea
lth
OR
Priv
ate
Hos
pita
lM
inis
try
of H
ealth
M
inis
try
of H
ealth
Scho
ols
Min
istr
y of
Ed
ucat
ion
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya
(Pub
lic W
orks
De
part
men
t)
AND
Min
istr
y of
Ed
ucat
ion
Jaba
tan
Kerj
a Ra
ya
(Pub
lic W
orks
De
part
men
t)
AND
Min
istr
y of
Ed
ucat
ion
Min
istr
y of
Ed
ucat
ion
Min
istr
y of
Ed
ucat
ion
Min
istr
y of
Ed
ucat
ion
Inst
itute
of H
ighe
r Le
arni
ngM
inis
try
of H
ighe
r Ed
ucat
ion
Priv
ate
OR
Publ
ic E
duca
tion
Inst
itutio
n A
ND
Min
istr
y of
Hig
her
Educ
atio
n
Priv
ate
OR
Publ
ic
Educ
atio
n In
stitu
tion
AND
Min
istr
y of
H
ighe
r Edu
catio
n
Priv
ate
OR
Publ
ic E
duca
tion
Inst
itutio
n A
ND
Min
istr
y of
Hig
her
Educ
atio
n
Min
istr
y of
Hig
her
Educ
atio
nM
inis
try
of H
ighe
r Ed
ucat
ion
Libr
arie
s
Min
istr
y of
In
form
atio
n,
Com
mun
icat
ion
and
Cultu
re
Min
istr
y of
In
form
atio
n,
Com
mun
icat
ion
and
Cultu
re
Min
istr
y of
In
form
atio
n,
Com
mun
icat
ion
and
Cultu
re
Min
istr
y of
In
form
atio
n,
Com
mun
icat
ion
and
Cultu
re
Min
istr
y of
In
form
atio
n,
Com
mun
icat
ion
and
Cultu
re
Min
istr
y of
In
form
atio
n,
Com
mun
icat
ion
and
Cultu
re
Art &
Cul
tura
l Ce
nter
s
Min
istr
y of
In
form
atio
n,
Com
mun
icat
ion
and
Cultu
re
Min
istr
y of
In
form
atio
n,
Com
mun
icat
ion
and
Cultu
re
Min
istr
y of
In
form
atio
n,
Com
mun
icat
ion
and
Cultu
re
Min
istr
y of
In
form
atio
n,
Com
mun
icat
ion
and
Cultu
re
Min
istr
y of
In
form
atio
n,
Com
mun
icat
ion
and
Cultu
re
Min
istr
y of
In
form
atio
n,
Com
mun
icat
ion
and
Cultu
re
Hot
els
Min
istr
y of
Tou
rism
Sa
raw
akPr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsPr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Min
istr
y of
Tou
rism
Sa
raw
akM
inis
try
of T
ouri
sm
Sara
wak
Hom
es, N
urse
ries
&
Kind
erga
rden
s
Min
istr
y of
Wel
fare
, W
omen
and
Fam
ily
Deve
lopm
ent
Sara
wak
Priv
ate
Busi
ness
O
wne
rPr
ivat
e Bu
sine
ss
Ow
ner
Priv
ate
Busi
ness
O
wne
r
Min
istr
y of
Wel
fare
, W
omen
and
Fam
ily
Deve
lopm
ent
Sara
wak
Min
istr
y of
Wel
fare
, W
omen
and
Fam
ily
Deve
lopm
ent
Sara
wak
78 Annexes
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Com
mun
ity
Cent
ers
(Inc
ludi
ng
Spor
ts F
acili
ties,
M
ultip
urpo
se H
alls
, et
c)
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
ilM
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
ilM
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
ilM
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Publ
ic H
ousi
ng-P
PR
(Fun
ded
Fede
ral)
Jaba
tan
Peru
mah
an
Neg
ara
Jaba
tan
Peru
mah
an
Neg
ara
Syar
ikat
Per
umah
an
Neg
ara
Berh
ad
(SPN
B)M
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il M
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Publ
ic H
ousi
ng-P
PR
( Sta
te)
Min
istr
y of
Hou
sing
Sa
raw
akM
inis
try
of H
ousi
ng
Sara
wak
Hou
sing
De
velo
pmen
t Co
rpor
atio
n (H
DC)
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il M
inis
try
of H
ousi
ng
Sara
wak
Min
istr
y of
Hou
sing
Sa
raw
ak
Adve
rtis
emen
ts
Min
istr
y of
Loc
al
Gove
rnm
ent
and
Com
mun
ity
Deve
lopm
ent A
ND
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il
Priv
ate
Com
pani
esPr
ivat
e Co
mpa
nies
Priv
ate
Com
pani
esM
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Priv
ate
Com
pani
es
Loca
l Aut
hori
ties
Ord
inan
ce 1
996
Loca
l Aut
hori
ties
(Adv
ertis
emen
ts)
By-L
aws,
201
2
Traffi
c M
anag
emen
t/
Cong
estio
n Co
ntro
l an
d M
onito
ring
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il AN
D/O
R Po
lice
Dira
ja
Mal
aysi
a (P
DRM
)
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il AN
D/O
R Po
lice
Dira
ja
Mal
aysi
a (P
DRM
)
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il AN
D/O
R Po
lice
Dira
ja
Mal
aysi
a (P
DRM
)
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il AN
D/O
R Po
lice
Dira
ja
Mal
aysi
a (P
DRM
)
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il AN
D/O
R Po
lice
Dira
ja
Mal
aysi
a (P
DRM
)
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il AN
D/O
R Po
lice
Dira
ja
Mal
aysi
a (P
DRM
)
Loca
l Aut
hori
ties
Ord
inan
ce 1
996
Land
Val
uatio
ns
(Sta
te L
and)
Valu
atio
n an
d Pr
oper
ty
Man
agem
ent
Depa
rtm
ent
(Mun
icip
al) A
ND
/ OR
Land
s an
d Su
rvey
s De
part
men
t Sa
raw
ak
Valu
atio
n an
d Pr
oper
ty
Man
agem
ent
Depa
rtm
ent
(Mun
icip
al)
Valu
atio
n an
d Pr
oper
ty
Man
agem
ent
Depa
rtm
ent
(Mun
icip
al)
Valu
atio
n an
d Pr
oper
ty
Man
agem
ent
Depa
rtm
ent
(Mun
icip
al)
Valu
atio
n an
d Pr
oper
ty
Man
agem
ent
Depa
rtm
ent
(Mun
icip
al) A
ND
/ OR
Land
s an
d Su
rvey
s De
part
men
t Sa
raw
ak
Valu
atio
n an
d Pr
oper
ty
Man
agem
ent
Depa
rtm
ent
(Mun
icip
al)
Sara
wak
Lan
d Co
de,
1958
Lo
cal A
utho
rity
O
rdin
ance
199
6
Build
ing
Cont
rol
Com
mer
cial
Stat
e Pl
anni
ng
Auth
ority
AN
D M
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsPr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Priv
ate
Ow
ners
/ M
anag
emen
t Co
rpor
atio
n
Sara
wak
Min
istr
y of
H
ousi
ng
Stat
e Pl
anni
ng
Auth
ority
M
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il
Stra
ta T
itles
Ord
inan
ce
1995
Bu
ildin
gs O
rdin
ance
19
94
Sara
wak
Lan
d Co
de
Tabl
e 3-
8 Co
ntin
ued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 79
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Resi
dent
ial
Stat
e Pl
anni
ng
Auth
ority
AN
D M
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsPr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Priv
ate
Ow
ners
/ M
anag
emen
t Co
rpor
atio
n
Sara
wak
Min
istr
y of
H
ousi
ng
Stat
e Pl
anni
ng
Auth
ority
M
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il
Stra
ta T
itles
Ord
inan
ce
1995
Bu
ildin
gs O
rdin
ance
19
94
Sara
wak
Lan
d Co
de
Publ
ic B
uild
ings
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
ilRe
spec
tive
Min
istr
ies
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
trie
sRe
spec
tive
Min
istr
ies
Sara
wak
Min
istr
y of
H
ousi
ng
Stat
e Pl
anni
ng
Auth
ority
M
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il
Loca
l Aut
hori
ties
Ord
inan
ce 1
996
Build
ings
Ord
inan
ce
1994
Sa
raw
ak L
and
Code
Her
itage
Bui
ldin
gs
Her
itage
Co
mm
issi
on
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs/
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
try
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs/
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
try
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs/
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
try
Her
itage
Co
mm
issi
on
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R M
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Her
itage
Co
mm
issi
on
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R M
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Nat
iona
l Her
itage
Act
20
05
No
Fly
Zone
s (B
uild
ing
Hei
ghts
)
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
(Dep
artm
ent o
f Av
iatio
n)AN
D M
unic
ipal
Cou
ncil
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
(Dep
artm
ent o
f Av
iatio
n)
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rsPr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
(Dep
artm
ent o
f Av
iatio
n) A
ND
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il
Min
istr
y of
Tr
ansp
ort
(Dep
artm
ent o
f Av
iatio
n) A
ND
Mun
icip
al C
ounc
il
Civi
l Avi
atio
n Ac
t 196
9
Spec
ial R
eser
ves
/ Zo
nes
Cont
rol
Sara
wak
Cor
rido
r of
Rene
wab
le E
nerg
y (S
CORE
)
Min
istr
y of
Fin
ance
AN
D
Regi
onal
Cor
rido
r De
velo
pmen
t Au
thor
ity (R
ECO
DA)
Min
istr
y of
Fin
ance
AN
D
Regi
onal
Cor
rido
r De
velo
pmen
t Au
thor
ity (R
ECO
DA)
Min
istr
y of
Fin
ance
AN
D
Regi
onal
Cor
rido
r De
velo
pmen
t Au
thor
ity (R
ECO
DA)
Min
istr
y of
Fin
ance
AN
D
Regi
onal
Cor
rido
r De
velo
pmen
t Au
thor
ity (R
ECO
DA)
Min
istr
y of
Fin
ance
AN
D
Regi
onal
Cor
rido
r De
velo
pmen
t Au
thor
ity (R
ECO
DA)
Min
istr
y of
Fin
ance
AN
D
Regi
onal
Cor
rido
r De
velo
pmen
t Au
thor
ity (R
ECO
DA)
Regi
onal
Cor
rido
rs
Deve
lopm
ent
Auth
oriti
es O
rdin
ance
of
200
6
Her
itage
Zon
es
Her
itage
Co
mm
issi
on
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs/
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
try
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs/
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
try
Priv
ate
Deve
lope
rs/
Resp
ectiv
e M
inis
try
Her
itage
Co
mm
issi
on
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Her
itage
Co
mm
issi
on
Mal
aysi
a AN
D/O
R M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Nat
iona
l Her
itage
Act
20
05
80 Annexes
Laye
rs o
f the
Cit
yPo
licy
Des
ign
Plan
ning
Cons
truc
tion
/
Impl
emen
tati
onM
aint
enan
ce /
Se
rvic
e D
eliv
ery
Regu
lato
rD
ata
Dep
osit
ory
Legi
slat
ion
Rive
r Res
erve
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sa
liran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
O
R Pr
ivat
e De
velo
pers
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sa
liran
(D
epar
tmet
n of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
O
R M
ajlis
Per
band
aran
(M
unic
ipal
)
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
Jaba
tan
Peng
aira
n &
Sal
iran
(D
epar
tmen
t of
Irri
gatio
n &
Dr
aina
ge)
Min
istr
y of
Nat
ural
Re
sour
ces
&
Envi
ronm
ent
Sara
wak
Riv
er
Ord
inan
ce 1
993
Sa
raw
ak R
iver
s (A
men
dmen
t)
Ord
inan
ce 1
997
Sara
wak
Riv
erin
e Tr
ansp
ort B
ill (1
993)
Fore
st R
eser
veFo
rest
ry
Depa
rtm
ent
Sara
wak
Fore
stry
De
part
men
t Sa
raw
ak
Sara
wak
For
estr
y Co
rpor
atio
n Fo
rest
ry D
epar
tmen
t Sa
raw
ak
Sara
wak
For
estr
y Co
rpor
atio
n Fo
rest
ry D
epar
tmen
t Sa
raw
ak
Fore
stry
De
part
men
t Sa
raw
ak
Fore
stry
De
part
men
t Sa
raw
ak
Fore
st O
rdin
ance
Sa
raw
ak 1
958
Sara
wak
For
estr
y Co
rpor
atio
n O
rdin
ance
, 199
5 N
atio
nal P
arks
and
N
atur
e Re
serv
es
Ord
inan
ce 1
998
Rest
rict
ed Z
ones
M
inis
try
of H
ome
Affai
rsM
inis
try
of H
ome
Affai
rsM
inis
try
of H
ome
Affai
rsM
inis
try
of H
ome
Affai
rsM
inis
try
of H
ome
Affai
rsM
inis
try
of H
ome
Affai
rs
Prot
ecte
d Ar
eas
and
Prot
ecte
d Pl
aces
Act
19
59
Tabl
e 3-
8 Co
ntin
ued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 81
3.2 List of Meetings for Institutional Analysis
Table 3-9: Meetings for Institutional Analysis
Date Meeting
April 18, 2014
Department of Statistics (DOSM)Town and Country Planning Department (JPBD)EPU
Institute of Ethnic Studies (KITA), UKM
April 21
JPBDNational Solid Waste Management DepartmentDepartment of HousingDepartment of Local Government
Federation of Malaysian Manufacturers
PEMANDU – Greater KL NKEA
April 22Ministry of Transport
JPBD Research and Development Division (MURNInets)
April 23
Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL)
Subang Jaya Municipal Council (MPSJ)
UPEN SelangorSelangor State Investment CorporationJPBD SelangorShah Alam City Council (MBSA)
JPBD
EPU – Distribution Section
Public Works Department (JKR)
United Nations Development Program (UNDP)
April 25
Public Private Partnership Unit (UKAS) in the Prime Minister’s Department
Kajang Municipal Council (MPKj)
American Malaysia Chamber of Commerce (Amcham)
June 11
UPEN Pulau PinangPenang State Housing Section (Bahagian Perumahan Pejabat Setiausaha Kerajaan Negeri)Majlis Perbandaran Pulau Pinang
Majlis Perbandaran Sungai Petani
June 12
Northern Corridor Investment AuthorityInvest PenangPenang State Development CorporationPenang Institute
Majlis Perbandaran Seberang Perai
June 15
UPEN JohorIskandar Regional Development Authority
Majlis Bandaraya Johor BahruMajlis Perbandaran Johor Bahru Tengah Majlis Perbandaran Pasir Gudang
June 17Majlis Daerah Kota Tinggi Majlis Daerah Pontian
82 Annexes
Date Meeting
June 18Majlis Daerah Kemaman
Majlis Daerah Dungun
June 19
ECER Development CouncilUPEN PahangMajlis Perbandaran KuantanMajlis Daerah Pekan
June 20 Malaysian Industry-Government Group for High Technology (MIGHT)
August 26
UPEN SabahSEDIADewan Bandaraya Kota KinabaluMajlis Daerah PenampangPejabat Daerah Putatan
August 27
UPEN SarawakSarawak State Ministry of Local Government and Community DevelopmentSarawak State Ministry of Natural Resources and EnvironmentSarawak State Land and Survey DepartmentDewan Bandaraya Kuching UtaraMajlis Bandaraya Kuching Selatan
August 28 Majlis Perbandaran Sepang
August 29 Perbadanan Putrajaya
3.3 Institutional Analysis: Selected Global Case Studies
3.3.1 Case study one: Decentralization in Indonesia
Case summary
18. Indonesia began the process of decentralization in 1999, and it became effective in 2001. The move towards decentralization was motivated by the desire to enhance public services, community empowerment, and local competitiveness. Political crisis and demand from local areas that were dissatisfied with the centralized system prompted this reform. Since decentralization, power sharing has been based on criteria including the incidence of externalities, accountability, and efficiency. The central government retains authority over foreign affairs, defense, security, judicial affairs, monetary and fiscal policy and religion. Decentralization has had some positive outcomes including increasing economic growth and enhancing public services such as education, health and general administrative process.
Country profile
19. Indonesia is a populous lower middle income country, with nearly 250 million people and a GDP of USD 868 billion in 2013 (World Bank Data n.d.). Indonesia is the largest economy in Southeast Asia. The country’s gross national income per capita has steadily increased from US$4,010 in the year 2000 to US$9,260 in the year 2013(World Bank Data n.d.). Indonesia has managed to fulfill many of its fiscal targets, including a significant decrease in Debt-to-GDP ratio from 57 percent in 2004 to 28 percent in 2009 (World Bank Data n.d.).
Table 3-9 Continued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 83
20. Geographically, the Indonesia archipelago stretches between Asia and Australia, with a total area of around 1.9 million sq km (CIA n.d.). Indonesia comprises many ethnic groups and religions, and has more than 300 local languages. Indonesia consists of 31 Provinces, one Autonomous Province, one Special Region and one National Capital District (CIA n.d.). Every province is made up of districts and municipalities.
Motivations for decentralization
21. After the economic crisis began in 1997, the politics of Indonesia became unstable. Mass protests forced the Suharto government to undertake democratic reform and a succession of national leadership. Reforms were initiated in 1998 when Suharto relinquished the presidency, and Habibie, the former vice president, became president.
22. During the Habibie period, many local regions called for more autonomy. Some regions even called for secession, which was supported by local officials who want to gain greater control of resources. This pressure made Habibie adopt a decentralization policy that was expected to maintain national unity through the promotion of more democratic government and increased participation of the local people.
The situation prior to decentralization
23. Prior to decentralization, administrative powers were held by the central government in a top-down system. Local governments did not have independence in policy making. Development planning and budget allocations were provisioned by the central government. All provincial and local expenditures were earmarked and were administered through line ministries’ offices at the provincial and district/municipality level (Sjahrir and Katos 2011).
24. The central government assigned local political leaders. Local public participation was weak because policies were created by elites in the central government and sometimes did not suit local needs and cultures.
25. The central government controlled most resources including funding, human resources, and natural resources. The perceived unfairness of natural resources allocations encouraged resource-rich regions to demand secession from Indonesia.
The process of decentralization
26. Indonesia underwent political, fiscal and administrative decentralization. The central government led the process by issuing local governance and fiscal balance laws. These laws made districts and municipalities the key administrative units responsible for providing most government services. The districts and municipalities have no hierarchic relationship to the provincial level. The Provincial governors acted as the central government’s representatives in the region. The full autonomy given to the districts and municipalities limited the power of local regions that might otherwise have had separatist demands if the power had shifted to the provincial level. Politically, decentralization gave autonomy to the newly democratically elected local parliaments (DPRD) to choose the heads of local governments, who would be responsible to DPRD.
27. After three years, the central government reviewed these regulations and their implementation, and later revised them to refine and to clarify the relationship and sharing of responsibilities between the central government, provinces and district/municipalities. The revised law introduced local direct elections to strengthen local accountability, gave provinces supervisory powers instead of powers of coordination, and strengthened their role as representatives of the central government, particularly in the area of planning and budgeting.
84 Annexes
The current system
28. Power sharing between the central, provincial and district/municipality governments is based on the following principles1:
a. The externality criterion is the approach of distributing governmental functions by considering the impacts/consequences that arise in the execution of those distributed functions. When impacts that arise are local in nature, then the governmental function in question comes under the authority of the regency/city; when regional in nature, then under provincial authority; and when national in nature, then under authority of the central government.
b. The accountability criterion is the approach of distributing governmental functions by considering that the level of government that handles a certain function is the level that is closest to the impact or conse-quence of that function. Accordingly, accountability for delivering those distributed governmental func-tions to the people will be better guaranteed.
c. The efficiency criterion is the approach of distributing governmental functions by considering the avail-ability of resources (personnel, funds, and equipment) to obtain the accuracy, certainty and speed of results that need to be achieved in the execution of distributed functions
29. Based on the criteria above, the central government only retains six authorities and responsibilities: foreign affairs, defense, security, judicial affairs, monetary and fiscal policy and religion. However, local governments participate even in these functions. Leaders are elected locally, and local governments have full control of local policies, laws and budgets.
30. Fiscal decentralization has made local government fully independent in allocation of its budget and raising local government revenues. However, most revenues, [e.g. in 2004, 92 percent for districts/municipalities and 51 percent for provinces (Kajian Pengeluaran Publik Indonesia 2007)], are still from central government resources, which makes the decentralization more administrative than fiscal in nature. Since decentralization, local governments have full authority over most sectors, excluding the six central government responsibilities mentioned above. Most aspects of education2, health3 and infrastructure4 sectors became the responsibility of the local government (Sjahrir and Katos 2011). Consequently, local governments have increased spending responsibility without the additional locally controlled revenue base necessary to support extra spending. This creates a gap between revenues and expenditures at the local level. To fill this gap, the central government implements three instruments: (i) resources revenue sharing, (ii) general purpose grants (known as Dana Alokasi Umum - DAU), (iii) special purpose grants (known as Dana Alokasi Khusus - DAK).
31. Revenue sharing comprises tax and non-tax revenue. Local governments have total discretion over the use of allocated funds.
32. DAU is calculated based on the fiscal gap plus base allocation that is determined by local government officer wage. The fiscal gap is calculated from fiscal needs minus fiscal capacity. Fiscal needs are calculated based
1 Explanation of Law No. 32 Year 20042 Local governments are responsible for the first nine years of education, which include six years of primary and three years of junior
secondary education3 Local governments are responsible for the majority of primary healthcare services, their financing and human resources. For instance, the
operation of health clinics (Puskesmas), which are the main providers of primary health services to the communities4 Local governments are responsible for district road, transportation, water services and its local water supply utilities.
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 85
on indices, including population, area, local GDP per capita, construction price index, etc. Fiscal capacity encompasses local revenue and revenue sharing.
33. DAK is given by the central government for specific tasks, particularly for development expenditure such as education, health, agriculture, forestry and infrastructure. The implementation of DAK is based on the central government’s ministerial guidelines. DAK cannot be used for research, training, administration and official travel.
The outcomes of the decentralization effort so far
34. Decentralization has promoted democracy and increased the ability of local regions to manage their own economic development, through bottom-up planning in keeping with local people’s aspirations. This has increased local public participation and fostered partnerships between stakeholders. Decentralization has increased economic growth significantly (Adi 2005), as well as development expenditure. Decentralization has also delivered more efficient and responsive public services such as education, health, infrastructure and general administrative services. After decentralization, local governments became responsible for the first nine years of education, and expenditures on primary and investments in secondary education became the first and second largest budgetary items for local governments (Sjahrir and Katos 2011). As a result, there has been an increase in literacy rates and years of schooling (Simatupang 2009). Decentralization improved health services, with one additional health clinic (Puskesmas) built per 10,000 of population on average (Sjahrir and Katos 2011). Mortality rates and life expectancy have also significantly improved (Simatupang 2009). Infrastructure development has also increased slightly (Sjahrir and Katos 2011). However, none of these achievements were caused by decentralization alone; they required well-functioning local political institutions, better informed citizens, transparent local government, and effective channels for political participation.
35. The greater amount of power at the district /municipality level encourages local elites to create new district/municipalities. The central government tends to accommodate the interests of local elites in order to avoid ethnic conflicts spurred by local elites. Between 1999 and 2010, there were 7 new provinces, 164 new districts and 34 new cities (Imron 2011). The proliferation of new local administrative units in the region has had some negative impacts. For example in the forestry sector, decentralization allows a local government to make its own laws and regulations, such as those relating to issuing logging permits. This has caused a proliferation of permits, with little regard for the effect on forest resources. As a result, large forest areas have been destroyed and threatened with conversion to other uses for which local people are not the primary beneficiaries (Resosudarmo 2004).
3.3.2 Case study two: Decentralization in Mexico
Case summary
36. Mexico started decentralization reform in 1983 in response to a debt crisis that left the federal government unable to provide adequate public services, and also to encourage development beyond Mexico City. Studies suggest that decentralization is more successful in areas where local regions have full control over budgeting and less central government funding. Decentralization provides better allocation of local services due to an information advantage through being closer to the recipient. In addition, decentralization also promotes good governance in rural local governments by increasing accountability and entrepreneurship.
86 Annexes
Country profile
37. Mexico is the second largest economy in Latin America and is a major oil producer and exporter. Even though production of oil has fallen in the last few years, about one-third of government revenue still comes from the oil industry. Mexico’s economy suffered during the financial crisis of 2008, but its economy has recovered since then through substantial foreign investment. Mexico’s population and GDP are respectively 122.3 million (2013) and USD 1.261 trillion (2013) (World Bank Data Bank n.d).
38. Mexico is a federal country with 32 states and nearly 2,500 municipalities. Local leaders are elected democratically for 3 years and cannot be re-elected. Between 1929 and 1997, the country had a single majority party. Since 1997, there have also been some opposition parties represented in the parliament.
Motivation for decentralization
39. The President Miguel de la Madrid led decentralization reform in 1983, for two main reasons. First, the debt crisis meant the federal government was unable to provide adequate public services, and second, over-crowding of population in the Federal District placed considerable strain on urban infrastructure and the ecological environment. President de la Madrid’s administration hoped that sharing administrative functions and responsibilities with states and municipalities would allow the federal government to simultaneously increase administrative efficiency and decrease its own accountability by shedding bureaucratic responsibilities (Elias 1997).
Situation prior to decentralization
40. Prior to the mid-1980s, although Mexico had a federal system of government, there was in fact no autonomy at the level of states and municipalities. This was because Mexico lacked a strong parliament that could balance the president, who dominated almost all aspects of the political process. The president could control all levels of government, including proposing candidates for the head of local government. In turn, these local leaders ensured the continued power of the incumbent government. The parliament was only able to pass laws that maintained the domination of the government.
The process of decentralization
41. Decentralization reform in 1983 had 3 goals: (i) to decentralize all federal agencies, both administratively and geographically; (ii) to strengthen federalism by increasing the power of states and local government; and (iii) to promote regional economic development (Elias 1997).
42. The first goal was accomplished by the decentralization of all ministries. The process of decentralization was coordinated by the Ministry of Budget and Planning. The second goal was implemented by reforming the Mexican constitution to strengthen federalism. Lastly, the third goal was accomplished by promoting industrial investment in places outside of Mexico City and by providing municipalities the legal and financial capabilities to operate without interference from the federal government.
43. Decentralization granted the municipalities the responsibility for potable water, drainage, sewerage, public lighting, refuse collection, cemeteries, streets, public parks, public safety, and slaughter houses. In addition, the central government also shared revenues through an ‘unconditional fund’ for each state. In 1997 the central government significantly increased the budgets of states and municipalities through a conditional fund that could be used on specific sectors such as social infrastructure, public safety and financial obligations.
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 87
The current system
44. The states’ and the municipalities’ budget revenues consist of unconditional and conditional funds from the central government, local taxes, fees and surcharges, grants and loans. The share of the municipality’s revenue is, on average, 63 percent from unconditional funds from the central government (participaciones), 11 percent from local taxes, 10 percent from surcharges and 16 percent from unconditional funds and sale or lease of state owned property (World Bank 1991).
45. Unconditional funds are assigned through the General Participatory Fund (GPF). The central government allocates at least 20 percent to the states and each state allocates at least 20 percent to municipalities. Conditional funds consist of FISM (Fund for Social Infrastructure) and FORTAMUN (Fund for Strengthening Municipalities). FISM is allocated by a formula through the Secretary of Social Development and FORTAMUN is distributed on a discretionary basis.
The outcomes of the decentralization effort so far
46. The overall impact of the 1983 reforms is mixed. Decentralization was more successful in those areas that did not require that the federal government to relinquish its hold on political power (Elias 1997). Consequently, local autonomy over resources was greater in areas that did not require large amounts of federal funding (Elias 1997). For instance, the decentralization of the Ministry of Education greatly improved the ability of the states to establish schools and provide teacher’s education by transferring material and financial resources from the federal to the state governments (Rodriguez 1987). Other research found that fiscal decentralization has been associated with changes in patterns of accountability and entrepreneurship, which tend to promote good governance in rural local governments (Moreno 2013). Conditional funds were found to be important in promoting both accountability and entrepreneurship, while unconditional funds had a negative effect on accountability and no effect on entrepreneurship. Being closer to local populations has allowed for more efficient allocation of resources in rural municipalities (Moreno 2013).
3.3.3 Case study three: Decentralization in Spain
Case summary
47. Spain began decentralization after the death of the dictator Francisco Franco in 1975. The new democratic constitution that was enacted in 1978 offered Spanish provinces the right to to establish autonomous regions, and specified the division of competences between the central government and these autonomous regions. The degree of autonomy in each region is different but generally decentralization gives them full control of education and health. By bringing decision making closer to the people, decentralization has improved efficiency as well as equity.
Country profile
48. Spain’s location between the Atlantic and Mediterranean Oceans and the European and African continents gives it a diverse history and culture. Spain’s total area is around 505,370 sq km, which consists of 17 autonomous communities and 2 autonomous cities (CIA n.d.). Its population and GDP are around 46.65 million (2013) and 1.4 trillion (2013) respectively (World Bank Data n.d.). The country’s GDP steadily increased until 2008, but after the global financial crisis it dropped 3.7 percent in 2009 and continued contracting through the middle of 2013(World Bank Data n.d.). The unemployment rate increased from 8 percent in 2007 to more than 25 percent in 2012 (World Bank Data n.d.).
88 Annexes
Motivation for decentralization
49. After the death of the dictator Francisco Franco in 1975, under King Juan Carlos as head of state, Spain made a transition from dictatorship to democracy. General elections took place in June 1976. During the campaign, all of the political parties included in their programs the elaboration of a new democratic constitution and the establishment of autonomy for the regions (Sanz n.d.).
50. Initially, the idea of decentralization was seen as a solution to the separatist demands of Basque and Catalan nationalities, including Galicia, but was also widely supported by the public. Eventually, the new democratic constitution converted Spain to a parliamentary monarchy in 1978.
Situation prior to decentralization
51. Spain was under Franco’s rule for 36 years following his victory in the Spanish Civil War. During this period, government was highly centralized and the constitution gave the central government ultimate authority to pass all laws. As the chief of state and government, Franco not only appointed and dismissed ministers but his government appointed mayors as well. Local municipal councils were effectively appointed by the heads of families and heads of local corporations.
The process of decentralization
52. The implementation of decentralization was driven by the approval of the new Spanish constitution in 1978. This constitution made Spain one of the most decentralized economies in Europe. It gave the right to Spanish provinces to establish autonomous regions, and specified the division of competencies between the central government and these autonomous regions.
53. The decentralization process in Spain was unique in its asymmetric nature. Every region approved their autonomy statutes and received local responsibilities separately. Regions that had common historic, cultural and economic characteristics, such as Catalonia, Basque, Galicia and Andalusia, received local autonomy immediately after their statutes were approved, while other regions had to wait up to 5 years after the approval of their statutes.
54. The decentralization process can be categorized into 4 phases (Sanz n.d.):
a. First phase (1979-1982): The statutes for 17 autonomous regions issued and commencement of decen-tralization process
b. Second phase (1983-1992): Some responsibilities such as university education transferred
c. Third phase (1993-2002): Transfer of education and health; the central government budget allocation for education and health decreased significantly
d. Fourth phase (2002-2008): Local autonomy reinforced; Basque proposal for new political statutes and the reform of Catalonia statutes
The current system
55. Responsibilities have shifted from the central government to the Autonomous Communities (ACs), which vary in level of autonomy. Every AC has its own statute of autonomy law that outlines the responsibilities of that AC. For example, Catalonia, the Basque Country and Galicia have special status, with their own languages
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 89
and other rights. Andalusia, Navarre, Valencia and the Canaries have more extensive powers than some other regions. Asturias and Aragon have taken steps to acquire language rights.
56. Decentralization creates functional specialization between the central government and the autonomous regions, as follows (Sanz n.d.):
a. Central Government: The functions performed by the central government are social security, transfers to the local regions, defense, foreign policy and justice
b. Autonomous Communities: The functions performed by ACs are health and education
c. Shared authority: The shared activities consist of 2 clusters. The first cluster, which accounts for roughly 13 percent of the central government's budget and 17 percent of the combined autonomous regions' budget, are “infrastructure”, “agriculture, fishing and nutrition”, “employment fostering” and “research, development and innovation”. The second cluster, accounting for roughly 5 percent of the central gov-ernment's budget and 8 percent of the combined autonomous regions' budget, are “housing”, “citizens´ safety”, “trade, tourism and small and medium enterprise”, “culture”, “industry and energy”, and “grants for transport”.
The outcomes of the decentralization effort so far
57. Fiscal decentralization had a positive impact in the health sector. An empirical study found that decentralization was one of the factors that had an influence on the effectiveness of public policies on infant mortality and life expectancy (Cantarero and Pascual 2008). Based on data from 1992 to 2003, infant mortality has decreased and life expectancy has increased. The education sector has also had a positive impact from decentralization. Improvements in efficiency in education have been greater in Autonomous Communities with good fiscal discipline and high level of per capita public revenues (Pena 2009). Decentralization has increased the ‘survival rate’ in school (i.e. the proportion students enrolled in the last course of Obligatory Secondary Education who move on to post-secondary education). The study also found that cost efficiency in Spanish local government increased when the local government had more responsibilities devolved to it (Ballaguer-Coll 2006). This research also found that the decentralization gains improved over time5.
3.4 Metropolitan Management – Approaches and Implications6
3.4.1 Why metropolitan management matters for Malaysia
58. In Malaysia, as in most urbanized countries, many large cities have become more economically interdependent with their surrounding settlements. These areas are often referred to as a metropolitan (metro) area or region, constitute a single economy and labour market, and share a community with common interests. The economic links between the core and the periphery can become so close, that one part cannot succeed without the
5 The research compared the efficiency of municipalities based on the duration of their independency.6 This annex is adapted from the paper “Metropolitan Management – Approaches and Implications” by Mats Andersson (2012). The paper was
based on a module on metropolitan finance and governance in the World Bank Institute e-learning course “Municipal Finances: A Learning Program for Local Governments” the http://einstitute.worldbank.org/ei/course/municipal-finances-learning-program-local-governments
All boxes are from the World Bank publication, Webster et al (2006) “Metropolitan Governance in China: Priorities for Action in the Context of Chinese Urban Dynamics and International Experience.”
90 Annexes
other. While political boundaries tend to be fairly stable, urban growth often changes the character of an area. Therefore, a metropolitan area usually includes a number of local government jurisdictions.
59. This mismatch between functional integration and political fragmentation creates a need for metropolitan-level management; to seize opportunities for collaboration, and prevent wasteful competition between local governments. Lack of any formal or informal governance arrangements at the metropolitan scale tends to create fragmentation of services (inefficiencies); “free ridership” by some jurisdictions (due to spillovers); environmental degradation; and underutilization of land with potentially higher value from a regional perspective.
60. Better metropolitan management would help make Malaysian cities more competitive. Currently, local governments are relatively weak, and unable to solve metropolitan-scale problems independently. Urban areas have been growing rapidly, but have struggled to keep up with citizen demand for services. At the same time, Malaysia has a complex, multi-tier system of government that makes it difficult for neighboring jurisdictions to coordinate to provide these services efficiently.
61. The six conurbations examined in this report are spread across multiple jurisdictions, indicating the need for a system of coordination at the metropolitan scale. The Greater Kuala Lumpur conurbation crosses 15 districts or federal territories and almost as many local authorities, the George Town/ Penang conurbation also crosses 15 districts and a few local authorities across three states, the Johor Bahru/ Iskandar conurbation crosses four districts and several local authorities, and Kuantan crosses three districts across two stastes. Each of these districts in turn is made up of multiple mukims. While there are no official conurbation boundaries for the remaining conurbations, looking at the spread of built-up areas suggests that the Kuching conurbation crosses at least two districts, while Kota Kinabalu crosses at least four. While these conurbations typically work as integrated units from the point of view of their economy, housing market, labor market, and mobility patterns, they are not recognized as such from an administrative point of view, as there is no administrative level between the individual districts and local authorities, and the states. Official conurbation boundaries indicate the general extent of a metropolitan area, but do not definitively enumerate which local authorities would need to be involved in metropolitan decision-making, as they do not align with district or mukim boundaries (e.g. see Figure 3-1).
62. A number of metropolitan areas around the world have tried to address similar problems, with varying degrees of success. This annex provides a typology of the main metropolitan-level governance approaches applied internationally, with their pros and cons, and related city examples. It concludes with a summary of lessons learned.
63. Malaysia’s jurisdictions, like Greater Kuala Lumpur in Figure 3-1, are highly multi-jurisdictional, and require collaboration between many local governments in order to function efficiently. Official conurbation boundaries do not clearly indicate which local authorities, or districts, fall within the conurbation.
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 91
Figure 3-1: Greater Kuala Lumpur jurisdictions
3.4.2 The need for metropolitan governance through political transformation
64. As metropolitan areas in Malaysia grow, there is an increasing need for coordination and joint decision-making by the area local governments, and management at a metropolitan scale of some functions and services. For example, while activities to retain businesses should normally be left to the lowest level of government, attracting new firms is usually best pursued at a regional level. Strong interdependencies also exist in tourism promotion and management. Solid waste disposal is a typical joint function for efficiency, while waste collection may be managed locally. Environmental impacts transcend jurisdictional boundaries, and inadequate maintenance of storm drains in one area can cause flooding in another (spillover effects).
65. International experience has shown that “there is not one size that fits all” due to local and national differences. (Slack 2007) Some institutional arrangements are established “bottom up”, i.e. through initiatives
92 Annexes
and agreements among the local governments in the area; some “top down”, i.e. by a provincial or national government. The arrangements often evolve, moving from one approach to another over time.7
66. While the system of local administration has a significant impact on the efficiency and equity of a regional economy, it also impacts the accessibility of residents to their local governments, the degree of public participation in decision-making, and the accountability and responsiveness of the governments. Efficiency, equity, and voice are essential for good metropolitan governance (Klink 2008). Slack concludes that the optimal design of government structure depends on which criteria are to be satisfied. Economies of scale, externalities, and equity lend themselves to large government units over an entire metropolitan area; the criteria of local responsiveness and accessibility and accountability point towards smaller government units. The challenge is to find the right balance between those criteria; this may be different in different metro areas.” (Slack 2007) Political factors often determine the choice of governance structure though.
67. Financial considerations are often prime incentives for creating special metropolitan arrangements.
a. Pooling financial or human resources: When synergy will be achieved through joint efforts (area promo-tion, procurement, borrowing, etc.);
b. Cost sharing: When scale economies will be gained by sharing costs for an investment (e.g. specialized equipment) or delivering a service;8
c. Management of Spillovers: When spillovers (externalities) across jurisdictions need to be addressed; e.g. air or water pollution (negative spillover); or if attractions are in one area while visitors stay and spend in another (positive spillover);
d. Reducing Disparity: When significant income and/or service inequality exist between jurisdictions (e.g. different tax base).
3.4.3 Metropolitan governance models
68. The main institutional approaches applied internationally to address these needs are categorized, described, and exemplified in Table 3-10. They range from: (a) ad hoc cooperation, and joint (temporary or permanent) coordination initiatives or arrangements; through (b) metropolitan planning and/or service delivery authorities; (c) a metropolitan-level / regional government; to (d) a consolidated local government through amalgamation of jurisdictions or annexation of adjacent areas by a city. While a municipal government covering most of its metro area facilitates coordination, local offices or sector arrangements may still be needed for efficiency and resident accessibility; cooperation across the area is often still a challenge.
3.4.4 Global experiences
69. International experience demonstrates a great diversity of metropolitan models, particularly across North America (Dodge 1996) and Europe (OECD 2006). Although many megacities are in South Asia, few examples exist of well-established and functioning approaches. Many metropolitan development authorities exist, but
7 Metropolitan management can be viewed as teamwork among local governments, particularly when a bottom-up approach is applied. Effective teamwork requires: (a) a common objective; (b) trust; and (c) that differences among members are viewed as strength, not as a weakness.
8 Alternatively it may be provided by one of the local governments, charging the others a fee.
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 93
these tend to mostly be focused on investment planning and land development. In East Asia, China, Japan and South Korea have consolidated and comprehensive metropolitan governments for their megacities (Yang 2009), while in the Philippines, Manila has had various regional governments with strong local government representation and the chair appointed by the President (Laquian 2005).
70. Where institutional arrangements at local levels are lacking or weak, coordination tend to be exercised by national or provincial/state governments (e.g. Lagos State). In Australia public transportation and other local functions are managed by the provincial governments. (Abbott, 2011) While an inter-governmental transfer system can be a powerful tool by a national government to influence inter-municipal affairs, it can also have unintended consequences if not carefully designed. Policies in Mexico in the 1990s, for example, unintentionally exacerbated the level of fiscal disparity in the metro area of Mexico City due to indirect negative effects of transfers on local tax collection, causing further disparity of infrastructure. Mitigating efforts proved to be constrained by legal and political complexities. (Raich 2008)
71. Often local governments do not evolve or cooperate unless they are required to do so by a higher level government, for example to be eligible for certain funding. Many regional planning councils were created following the availability of EU regional economic development grants (OECD 2006). However, this does not always create lasting arrangements. In the United States, it was for many years a pre-requisite for obtaining certain grant funding from the US federal government that the local governments present their needs and solutions through a regional plan. When these requirements ended, the effectiveness of many regional bodies that had been created diminished. (Post 2004) Other incentives for local/regional coordination have been through inter-governmental systems (e.g. in India), enabling legal frameworks (e.g. in France, Poland and Italy), and through financial incentives and political influence (e.g. in the Netherlands).
94 Annexes
Table 3-10: Metropolitan governance models9
Approach Characteristics Pros (advantages) Cons (disadvantages) Examples
1. HORIZONTAL COOPERATION AMONG LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
(i) Case-by-case joint initiatives
When joint action puts local governments in a stronger position to: (i) achieve economies of scale (e.g. bulk purchasing, contracting, firefighting, road maintenance, tourism promotion); or (ii) to attract firms, events, or tourists. When significant costs are involved, a cost sharing formula needs to be agreed upon.
Useful for areas with limited inter-dependencies (or with few local governments).Can be an initial phase to build trust for further, more permanent coordination. Useful if formal arrangements are constrained by politics or prohibited legally.
Usually limited in scope.No commitment to address needs on an on-going basis.
City candidates for an international conference or sports event tend to apply on behalf of their metro area.
(ii) Contracting among Local Governments
A local government engaging another local government for the delivery of a service `that they are responsible for.
One government can specialize in a service, for the benefit of others in the area.Useful when one local government dominates in terms of capacity.
Access by residents to a service provider may be affected; accountability may be weakened or unclear.A contracting local government still needs to monitor service quality and coverage provided.
Common in California, USA. E.g. many smaller local governments are contracting Los Angeles County for certain service provision.Cit of Amman, Jordan is collecting revenues on behalf of other cities in the country.
(iii) Committees, Associations, Commissions, Working groups, Partnerships, Consultative platforms, etc.
Temporary or permanent bodies for coordination. Often character of networks rather than institutions (OECD, 2006)
Flexible approaches. Usually advisory role only.
Ruhr, GermanyTurin and Milan, ItalyParis, FranceGreater Toronto, Canada
2. METROPOLITAN / REGIONAL AUTHORITY (Special Purpose District) Independent legal entity; voluntary association created by local governments to make better use of their public resources. (i)-(iv) are variations of the approach.
“Bottom-up”, voluntary organizations by local governments.
Effectiveness tends to depend on the level of member commitment.
Particularly common in USA and France.
(i) Metropolitan Council of Governments (COG)
A forum for coordinated efforts by member local governments. Decisions need endorsement of the respective local Council (to not undermine the accountability of the individual local governments).
A forum to address common / regional interests while maintaining local authority and identity. Flexible, if allowing members to join/exit at any time, or participate on some subjects only.
Impact depends on: (a) the financial and human resources mobilized or allocated to the COG; and (b) the degree of coherence on views on metro issues among member councils.
Common in USASao Paolo, BrazilMontreal, Canada
9 Privatization or public-private partnerships (PPP) are not specifically addressed in this paper.
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 95
Approach Characteristics Pros (advantages) Cons (disadvantages) Examples
2. METROPOLITAN / REGIONAL AUTHORITY (cont.)
(ii) Planning Authority A formal entity similar to COG to design regional strategies and/or exercise planning and policy development authority. With broad mandate or narrow focus (such as for a river basin). They may or may not have authority to enforce or implement plans.
Permanent focal point for regional planning.Specialized analytical resources (to highlight spillovers, potential for scale economies, inequalities, etc.)
Limited impact if only advisory role. Enforcement may require significant institutional capacity to be effective.
Regional Plan Association for New York metro area (NGO with advisory role) Portland, USA, with decision-making power (now an elected metro government).
(iii) Service Delivery Authority
A public service agency (utility corporation or cooperative) owned by member local governments. Responsible for delivery of one or more services. (Various single-service authorities in an area may create another coordination need.)Can usually levy user fees, taxes, or collect funds from the local governments.
Useful to achieve efficiencies for certain service(s).Local governments engaged as active owners via representation on the council/board. Can operate as businesses with professional board members.
Effectiveness depends on financial authority, e.g. to levy user fees, collect contributions from member governments, apply precept powers, have earmarked transfers, or tax authority.10 Access by residents may be affected; accountability may be weak or unclear.
Greater Vancouver Regional Service District (GVRSD), Canada, a multi-service public corporation (some planning functions)Bologna, Italy
(iv) Planning & Service Delivery Authority
Combination of (ii) & (iii), i.e. planning and delivery of one or more services (e.g. a Regional Transport or Water Authority).
Combination of (ii) & (iii) Combination of (ii) & (iii) Common in France.11
• Grand Lyon • Communauté Urbaine of Marseille
3. METROPOLITAN-LEVEL / REGIONAL GOVERNMENT
Centralization of some functions while preserving local identities via first-level local governments.
Access by residents may be affected; accountability may be weakened or unclear.12
96 Annexes
Approach Characteristics Pros (advantages) Cons (disadvantages) Examples
(i) A Metropolitan-level Local Government
A separate metro level local government, with a directly elected Council or one appointed by the area local governments.Responsible for coordination and selective functions (may or may not include service delivery). It may or may not have authority over the other local governments.
A permanent government structure for certain metro functions.Specialized metropolitan-level resources.
Effectiveness tends to depend on: (a) the degree of its authority over the other local governments; (b) funding; and (c) if mainly planning functions or some service delivery functions as well.
Toronto, Canada 1954-98Cape Town, RSA (to 2000)Abidjan, Cote d’Ivoire (to 2001)Dar es Salaam, Tanzania (no authority over other (3) local governments) Budapest, Hungary (with limited authority) London, UK (substantial authority over boroughs)
(ii) A Regional Government Established by Higher Level Government13
A government established by a provincial or national government for a metro area. Funding would usually be part of the higher tier government budget.
A permanent government structure (elected, or appointed) for certain metropolitan functions.Specialized resources.Funding would normally not be an issue.
Risk of limited engagement by the local governments in the area.
The Twin Cities, USA (appointed by the state) Portland, USA (elected) Abidjan, Cote d’IvoireMadrid, SpainStuttgart, Germany (directly elected) London, UK (with directly elected Mayor)Ile-de-France (Paris)Manila, The Philippines(strong local representation; chair appointed by President)
4. CONSOLIDATED LOCAL GOVERNMENT (through amalgamation or annexation)
Jurisdiction covering a large portion (or all) of the metropolitan area.
Facilitates coordination, redistribution / equalization (one tax base) and scale economies.
Resident access to the local government may be affected, and local responsiveness and accountability weakened.Reduce competition and public choice.
Cape Town, South Africa Pittsburgh, USAToronto, CanadaIstanbul, Turkey
10 11 12 13
13 The Ministry of Nairobi Metropolitan Development, Kenya can be considered a variation of this although with no direct authority over the area local governments.
Table 3-10: Continued
10 If local governments are mostly funding the authority, they need to be adequately represented on its board or council to ensure the accountability of decisions.
11 The areas and average populations of French local governments are small by international standards. They therefore make extensive use of cooperative arrangements for their service provision. France has a particular legal framework for inter-municipal cooperation (‘syndicats intercommunaux’). The syndicates are similar to cooperatives or federations of local governments to carry out single or multiple functions. A local government may be involved in several syndicates.
12 Some argue that large-scale metropolitan governments lead to greatly reduced citizen participation, and weakened democratic accountability. (Oakerson, 2004).
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 97
3.4.5 Metropolitan (regional) authority: city examples14
Variety of approaches for a metropolitan authority
72. Planning and service consolidation through a metropolitan authority can generate efficiency gains, particularly for smaller local governments in a metro area to remain independent yet efficient, signing service delivery contracts with the metro authority or utility company.15 Characteristics of a metro authority are reflected in Table 3-11, distinguishing options for each dimension. For example, some transport authorities are characterized by items in bold.
Table 3-11: Characteristics of metropolitan authorities
Dimension Option 1 Option 2
Function Planning Planning and Service Delivery
Scope Single Sector/Function Multiple Sectors/Functions
Degree of Authority Advising/guiding Managing
Legal status Public Sector Agency Public Sector Corporation or Utility Company
Operational Non-profit For profit
Accountability of Council/Board16
Appointed or elected by the local governments in the Area
Elected by the residents in the Area
Tax sharing agreements
73. Tax competition is sometimes tempting for local governments to attract business and high-income residents. However, reduction of tax rates sometimes becomes “a race to the bottom” and loss of revenues.
74. Communauté Urbaine of Marseille, France is a consortium of seventeen cities which uses a joint system for collection of a business tax with common tax rate, avoiding tax competition and achieving more cost-effective tax collection. It is governed by a body of the mayors and councilors of the municipalities, responsible for regional economic development, transport, land use and housing, crime prevention, waste disposal and environmental policies. Marseille transitioned from informal cooperation among a few local governments focused on a few roads and traffic projects, to a regional planning and service delivery authority.
75. The local governments (58) in the Grand Lyon, France area have a tax sharing arrangement whereby part of the local tax revenues are allocated to a common budget for metro level initiatives and expenditures.
76. The Twin Cities (Minneapolis-St.Paul), USA experienced significant mismatch between social needs and tax base (income and property tax) between two central cities and suburban areas. They established a Metro Council with access to part of the property taxes in the region to finance certain services and targeted transport subsidies. This council evolved into a Regional Government appointed by the Minnesota state government, and subsequently to a public sector corporation.
14 Basic data on city examples in the paper can be found on www.wikipedia.com 15 “The whole is greater than the sum of the parts” is a saying in this regard. However, if the parts cannot come together politically to add up
to the whole, then they may be worse off. (McCarthy, 2011)16 An additional option is when appointed by a provincial or national government.
98 Annexes
Flexible arrangements
77. The metro governance in Bologna, Italy was established on a voluntary basis in 1994 by forty-eight local governments and the province of Bologna. A metropolitan council is composed of all the mayors and presided over by the provincial president. Each local government is free to withdraw at any time and may participate in some or all activities of the council; a low-risk approach for the governments in the area.
78. A metropolitan authority needs to be properly funded. Greater Vancouver Regional Service District (GVRD), Canada finances its services through user charges, a share of property tax, and annual contributions from the member local governments, but has also been given authority to collect a road and gasoline tax in the metropolitan area. This metropolitan administration is now a public corporation with a Board composed of representatives of the eighteen member local governments; another flexible, demand-driven organization providing different services to its members through individual agreements. Since its establishment in 1965 numerous services have been added, including human resource management services on a contract basis. It does not have any strong land use planning powers though. GVRD was initially established by the provincial government, but has evolved to a corporation governed by the member municipalities. (See Box 3-1 to learn more about the GPVD’s history and approach).
3.4.6 Metropolitan-level planning through non-governmental organizations
79. Metropolitan-level planning is sometimes carried out by non-governmental organizations.
80. Regional Plan Association (RPA) serves the New York–New Jersey–Connecticut Metropolitan Region, which is comprised of 31 Counties. RPA is an independent metropolitan policy, research and advocacy group, which performs most of the regional planning functions, partly funded by the area Counties. (See Box 3-2 for more information on the RPA’s role in planning for the New York metro area.)
81. Although a new constitution in Brazil (1989) increased the autonomy of local governments and delegated responsibility for designing metropolitan structures to the state legislatures, relatively few examples of formal inter-municipal cooperation exist except in the São Paulo ABC Region17. This metro organization has had particularly active engagement of the civil society and the local private sector, and has played important roles in the economic development of the area (the City of São Paolo does not participate however). It was created to reinvent the region with a new economic vision after a period of very high unemployment.
17 The name refers to three small cities bordering São Paulo, initially forming this cooperation.
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 99
Municipal development agencies
82. A separate agency for planning and development has been established for some cities; some with a mandate focused on land use and master planning (Delhi Development Authority in India, and Dhaka Capital Development Authority (RAJUK) in Bangladesh)18 (Siddiqui, 2004), others with broader city development mandates such as Lagos Mega-City Development Authority in Nigeria, and London Development Agency in the UK, recently incorporated into the Greater London Authority to which the Mayor of London reports. These regional authorities combine some governing authority with development and service functions. They often receive state or municipal land to develop and sell.
3.4.7 Metropolitan-level / regional government: city examples19
Metropolitan-level local governments: institutional evolutions
18 Both established by the national governments.19 Municipal governments which essentially cover their metro areas can also be viewed as “metropolitan local governments” (e.g. in China
and South Africa).
Box 3-1 Greater Vancouver Regional District: An evolutionary approach to regional, district-based metropolitan planning & management
The Greater Vancouver Regional Districts (GVRD) was established in 1965; it now encompasses 21 municipalities that make up the metropolitan area of Greater Vancouver, an area that is home to 2.1 million people (2005), forecast to reach 2.7 million by 2021. The GVRD was originally constituted to deliver services most efficiently accomplished at a regional level, namely sewerage, drinking water, health/hospitals, and industrial development services. It has added functions over the years, including recycling, affordable housing, regional parks, air quality control, labor relations, and emergency communications (911). GVRD’s mandate is to cost-effectively deliver utilitiy services at the regional scale, to plan and manage regional growth and development, and to protect and enhance the quality of life in the Region. The GVRD’s Board of Directors is the primary decision-making body and collective voice in regard to regional development issues. The Board of Directors is comprised of mayors and councilors from the member municipalities. Board meetings are held once a month and are usually open to the public.
The GVRD stresses the involvement and participation of interested members of the general public. Under the umbrella of the GVRD, there are four separate legal entities: the GVRD/University of British Columbia (UBC) Joint Committee, the Greater Van-couver Water District (GVWD), the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District (GVS&DD), and the Greater Vancouver Housing Corporation (GVHC). In addition, the Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority (Trans Link) was formed in 1998 as a body associated with the GVRD to coordinate and implement transportation plans and services for the movement of people and goods in the Region. Trans Link also operates the Air Care program, which aims to improve air quality by reducing harmful emissions from automobiles. From 1992 to 2002, the program is credited with reducing air emissions in the urban area by thir-ty-five percent. Vancouver has received numerous international awards, and ranks amongst the most livable cities in the world, according to premier media, such as, The Economist. Maintaining this quality of life is a significant challenge particularly in the face of population pressures, changing demographics, and economic re-structuring, plus demands for housing and employment associated with rapid growth.
In 1990, the GVRD Board produced Creating our Future: Steps to a More Livable Region to respond to challenges facing the region. It engaged more than 4,000 residents in a public consultation process. The over 200 issues identified in the process resulted in agreement to take 54 actions, incorporated in the Livable Region Strategic Plan introduced in 1996. Importantly, like most metropolitan agencies worldwide, the regional strategy advocates development of Regional Towns to minimize urban sprawl, commuting, and air pollution.
100 Annexes
83. International experience suggests that flexibility of governance arrangements over time is advisable as the local and regional circumstances change. The following examples have all had a local metropolitan government at some time, but have evolved between different models. (Slack, 2007)
84. Toronto, Canada operated under 13 independent municipalities until 1953, when a two-level system with an elected Metro Toronto and six additional independent local governments were established (each level with separate functions). In 1995 these seven entities were merged into one local government for the City of Toronto (still only representing about 50 percent of the population in the metropolitan area). The changes were made to increase effectiveness in service delivery and harmonize service levels across the area, and the provincial government played an important role in the institution's evolution.
85. London, UK was governed by a two-level structure from 1964 to 1986, the Greater London Council (GLC) and 32 local governments (each with its own mayor and council). In 1986, the GLC was abolished and governance of London became the responsibility of central government ministers, using ad hoc arrangements for regional planning. Since 2000, London again has a city-wide government with elected members of a Greater London Authority (GLA) and since 2002 also a directly elected mayor. GLA is a higher-level strategic authority to promote sustainable development and define strategy, particularly for transport, police, economic development planning, fire and emergency planning, land use planning, culture, environment, health, and coordination of London-wide events. GLA and local governments have little fiscal autonomy; more than 80 percent of their revenues come from central government grants.
86. Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire. Reforms in 1978 restored “commune” status to the major cities in Côte d’Ivoire. Abidjan, the former capital and the largest city in the country, had ten local governments, each with elected mayor and council. At the same time, a metropolitan government, the City of Abidjan, was established for
Box 3-1 Continued
Other agencies, the private sector, and residents use the plan to understand and contribute to Greater Vancouver’s vision for its future development. It helps all stakeholders “to face in the same direction”.
To improve metropolitan governance, the GVRD set up the Sustainable Region Initiative Forum. Regular discussion and meetings such as sustainability community breakfasts and regional dialogues are organized. In addition, the Greater Vancouver Economic Council (GVEC) has been established as the catalyst to deepen high promise industrial clusters and thereby enhance the regional economy. An important mandate of the GVEC is to take the lead in attracting investment to the Region through marketing and branding. GVEC’s mission is to support development, positioning the Region as the West’s Gateway to Asia and Canada’s “Cre-ative City”.
Much can be learned from the GVRD case. Of note is its evolutionary character. Although originally created to deliver “routine” functions such as sewerage, it has steadily added functions over the years as confidence in its role has increased. It does this in two ways: (i) internally, e.g., through agencies such as the GVHC, which operates within the GVRD’s institutional framework, and (ii) by spinning off entities such as the GVEC. Although it increasingly appears to be a regional government, it denies this role, being careful to allow constituent municipalities to maintain their autonomy. Important in this regard is the fact that municipali-ties can choose to opt out of any function or service provided by the GVRD. Much of GVRD’s success can be explained by its ability to mediate tensions between the British Columbia Provincial Government (Provincial governments are very powerful in Canada) and constituent municipal governments.
Sources: GVRD 2006; Western Ecoomic Diversification Canada 2006; Webster et al 2006
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 101
Box 3-2 New York Metropolitan Region: A legitimized civil society approach to megapolitan planning: the pioneering role of the regional planning association
The New York metropolitan region (NYMR) is the most populated urbanized area in the U.S. (2005 U.S. Census Bureau CSA pop. 21.9 million), and based on the UN urban agglomeration classification, the third largest in the world (after Tokyo and Mexico City). It covers 31 counties of the tri-state New York- New Jersey-Connecticut region encompassing 33,670 sq km. New York City, the core of the metropolitan region has a population of over 8.1 million with an area of 830 sq km, only 2.5% of the land area of the metropolis. A global city, New York is known for international finance, fashion, entertainment and culture. New York City itself has been a metropolitan municipality with a strong mayor-council government since its creation, the product of a consolidation of a number of autonomous local governments in 1898. The mayor is elected to a four-year term while 51 councilors are elected to two-year terms, strengthening the power of the mayor.
There is no “official” regional planning organization for the NYMR, but the Regional Plan Association (RPA), as an independent, not-for-profit regional planning organization is highly influential in planning both the region and its component jurisdictions. It is the de facto Regional Planning agency for the NYMR, having more power and a more impressive track record than virtually any metropolitan planning organization in the United States. This civil society based approach to planning in the NYMR is not regarded as a stepping stone to legal formalization, but a more advanced approach to regional planning based on collaborative planning, currently in vogue in both governmental and academic circles. Collaborative planning involves bringing representatives of key interests to the table, governments being only one of the parties involved, although they are expected to legalize most outcomes of the process (some initiatives can be implemented purely through non-governmental means). The RPA’s de facto legitimacy and stellar reputation is the product of two factors, its long history, and the high quality of its work. It was established in 1922.
RPA has played a key role in shaping the Region’s transportation systems, protecting open spaces, and promoting high quality urban development. The First Regional Plan completed in 1929 set the form for the Region’s growth over the next several decades, correctly identifying transportation and open space networks as the key levers to shape the Region. The Second Regional Plan in 1968 successfully targeted: (i) restoration of the Region’s deteriorated mass transit system, and (ii) revitalization and strength-ening of urban centers to make mass transportation more viable, preserve natural resources, and create areas of high urban intensity within the vast Region. The Third Plan, in 1996, A Region at Risk, addressed the Region’s extreme fiscal problems. In the post 9/11 period, RPA has been involved in the redevelopment of lower Manhattan, seriously damaged by the terrorist attacks, as well as strengthening disadvantaged communities such as East Harlem, through community based activities.
As well as being a world-class regional research and planning organization, RPA has considerable strengths as an advocacy organization, an educational and awareness agency (working with local governments, communities, and the public), the lat-ter strengthened by partnerships such as with the Institute on Community Design at Princeton University. One of the greatest strengths of the RPA is its links with leading US professional groups such as the American Institute of Architects (AIA), the Amer-ican Institute of Planners (AIP), and the American Society for Public Administration (ASPA). Strong professional connections enable the RPA to access some of the best talent in city building, at affordable rates, or even on a voluntary basis.
RPA always takes an interdisciplinary perspective that integrates economic development (competitiveness), human resources and the human condition, land use, transportation, and environmental and design expertise. To implement, RPA’s main strategy is to build an alliance of various stakeholders, including local governments, interest groups (e.g., environmental), professional groups, and the business community. Given the enormous power of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, RPA has long worked closely with them, using the Authority as a lever to shape the Region.
Sources: Alfsen-Norodom 2004; Civic Alliance 2006; Regional Planning Association 2006; Webster et al 2006
102 Annexes
many local functions, with a council of the City mayor and four councilors from each local government. The mayor of the City was indirectly elected by the ten mayors. This system functioned for over 20 years, but the local governments were constrained by the national government in carrying out some functions, and the City had little influence over its finances. National government collected property taxes and remitted them to the local governments which then paid (often delayed) a portion to the City. (Stren, 2007) In 2001, the City of Abidjan was replaced by a Regional Government, or “District” of Abidjan. The post of City Mayor was replaced by a District Governor appointed by the President of the country. The original ten local governments were maintained and three suburban jurisdictions and some rural areas were added.
87. Johannesburg, South Africa, the largest city in South Africa by population, evolved from a segregated city with eleven councils, through a stage with one Metro Council plus four subordinated Local Councils, to the current one single-level city government covering the main part of the metropolitan area. It has been innovative in shaping its internal governance by issuing management contracts for water and sanitation services; corporatizing road and solid waste functions; and moving to private management of its real estate.
Regional Government Established by a Provincial or National Government
88. Metropolitan governance reforms have rarely emerged purely from local government initiatives; rather, a national or provincial government has usually either imposed or encouraged it (OECD 2006).
89. Portland, Oregon, USA. Initially Portland had a COG/planning authority for primarily land use management. It took on additional functions, and eventually was elevated to a directly elected regional government established by the Oregon State Government. It may now levy property, sales, and income taxes, and issue Metro bonds for investments.
90. Verband Region Stuttgart, Germany was created by the Baden-Wurtenberg state government in 1993 as a directly elected higher-level metropolitan entity for an area with 179 local governments. Its main responsibility at present is serving as a public transport authority. For its broader purposes it has become fairly weak, in large part because it has no authority to levy taxes or user charges. Its funding is derived about equally from local government contributions and the state government. (OECD 2006)
91. Metro Nairobi, Kenya (a different approach). A Ministry of Nairobi Metropolitan Development was established in 2008 by presidential decree to facilitate implementation of a development strategy for this, extremely large (32,000 km2) area of fifteen local governments. However, participation of the main city, City of Nairobi, has been limited.
3.4.8 Consolidated local government: city examples
92. Annexation or amalgamation of jurisdictions may sometimes be the most effective approach to achieve needed scale and equity in public service provision. Yet, this tends to be the most politically controversial, usually requiring active involvement of a national or provincial government. Few amalgamations have achieved coverage of an entire metropolitan area. However, in those cases where local governments do indeed cover their economic region, coordination is less challenging in terms of institutional complexity. However, allocation of resources and services to the residents across the area still often presents challenges.
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 103
93. Cape Town, South Africa boundaries were drawn by the Municipal Demarcation Board20 in 1998, and now include almost all people who live and work in the metro area (2,461 km2).
94. Istanbul, Turkey had its administrative boundaries expanded in 2004 to include provinces previously governed by the central government, increasing its area from 1,830 to 5,340 km2. (Turan 2011)
95. Shanghai Municipal Government, China (and similarly all larger municipalities in China) covers its entire metropolitan area (6,340 km2).
96. Chinese cities have a two-level local government structure; a municipal government with a number of subordinated district and county governments. Districts are the more urban ones, and counties the more rural ones. Coordination is often still challenging due to counties being quite independently governed; an example where political economy and legacy may influence how an area is functioning in practice. In this case, the municipal government tend to limit its involvement with how the county governments run their affairs in order not to interfere with how they meet their performance targets.
97. Additional examples where the local governments (with subordinated districts or wards) essentially cover their respective economic regions are Seoul, Tokyo, and Istanbul. (OECD, 2006). See Box 33 for information about the Seoul Metropolitan Government.
3.4.9 Large infrastructure projects: special situations
98. Managing and funding infrastructure projects that benefit various local jurisdictions needs special arrangements, sometimes a separate project entity to implement the project and possibly to also own, operate and maintain the assets. A higher tier government often has a key role to play, as exemplified below.
99. ARPEGIO is a public sector company in Madrid, Spain through which a directly elected regional government undertakes projects in coordination with local governments. ARPEGIO obtains public land from local governments for development, marketing and management. It allows agile planning and execution of projects that are not attractive for the private sector.
100. A Metrorail Project is under construction in the Greater Washington Area in United States, extending rapid transit service to an international airport and employment centers in the area. The project funding is from: (i) voluntary taxes on local businesses/landowners; (ii) toll road revenues; (iii) two local governments; (iv) one state government; and (v) grant funds from the US Federal Government (from gas tax revenues and economic stimulus funds).
20 Similar consolidations were done across the country creating six large metropolitan municipalities.
104 Annexes
3.4.10 Lessons learned and policy implications
101. Lessons from international experience in metropolitan management for Malaysian policy makers include the following:
» When the population of one local government is dominant in a metro area, this tends to be an additional challenge for achieving joint actions (e.g. Nairobi, Sao Paolo, Paris). Care should be taken so that each of the jurisdictions is able to voice its needs.
» Few cities cover their entire metropolitan area. While having one local government covering most of its metro area may facilitate coordination, government accountability and accessibility by residents may suffer; and area-wide coordination may still be a challenge (South Africa, China).
» Evolution from one model to another is not uncommon as local and regional circumstances change and learning takes place (London, Minneapolis-St. Paul, Portland, Toronto).
» Active involvement of a higher level government is often required to ensure arrangements for reasonable coordination of public services and area-wide development (Abidjan, Manila, Stuttgart, Toronto). However, metropolitan arrangements created in a “top-down” manner by a provincial or national government will often be weak unless they are actively supported by the area local governments (Dar es Salaam, Stuttgart).
» Cost savings is often an argument for amalgamation or annexation. However, as the case of Toronto has shown, by unifying salaries and services across the earlier local government areas, the overall costs may go up.
102. The implications for policy and practice in a particular metropolitan area include:
» Determine where are the largest gains from joint or coordinated actions (“differences which would make a difference”).
» Engage stakeholders thoroughly.
» Find a balance between achieving efficiency and social equity, and ensuring voice and accountability.
103. Given the large number of agencies at various levels that already exist in the Malaysian context, creating new government bodies (e.g. London, Nairobi) may simply add to the complexity, making coordination even more difficult. Consolidation of local governments (e.g. Cape Town, Istanbul, Chinese cities) may work in the case of smaller conurbations. Systems by which local governments can coordinate on individual services (e.g. transportation planning in US metro areas) or metropolitan-scale investments (Madrid, Washington), or flexible, voluntary arrangements as in Bologna, Italy, could benefit Malaysian metro areas without the disruption of creating new agencies or consolidating jurisdictions. These could be encouraged by the national or state governments by linking metropolitan coordination with funding opportunities. Such arrangements could gradually formalize and take on more re sponsibilities over time, as in Greater Vancouver. Lastly, support for long-term strategic planning at the metropolitan scale, separate from day-to-day urban service delivery, provided by a non-governmental organization (e.g. RPA in New York) could help guide local governments act in a more coordinated manner.
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 105
Box 3-3 Seoul Metropolitan Government: Leadership from the metropolitan core
The Seoul Metropolitan Area (SMA) constitutes the core of the Seoul Metropolitan Region (SMR), the latter a megapolitan area containing 48% of South Korea’s population (23 million). The SMR typifies extended urban regions in East Asia, it is nineteen times as large in area as the SMA, with an area of 11,773 square kilometers. Over time, an increasing proportion of the SMR’s population lives outside the SMA; in part because SMA’s area has been extended only slightly between 1963 and 2004 (from 595 to 605 sq. kms.), combined with the fact that the population of the SMA peaked in 1992 at 11 million, declining to 10.3 million by 2004 through suburbanization and peri-urbanization processes.
Within the SMA, the city’s efficiency has been increased substantially through the establishment of public corporations, e.g., the Seoul Metro Corporation and the Seoul Metropolitan Rapid Transit Corporation, which are responsible for 9 subway lines, the Seoul Housing Corporation responsible for low income housing, and the Seoul Metropolitan Facilities Management Corporation, responsible for car-only roads and parking facilities. The SMG is now focused on quality of life, given that efficiency objectives have largely been achieved. This shift is described as a shift from a growth oriented (quantitative) model to a growth management (quality) model. The latter includes restoration of historic, cultural, and natural environments. Related to the latter, Seoul has attracted global attention by restoring Cheonggyechon Stream which runs through the heart of the city. This has involved removal of an expressway (that covered it) – a cost deemed acceptable, given the shifting values of increasingly wealthy SMA residents.
Megapolitan governance is based on three tiers: the SMR, SMG and the Districts. Typical of extended urban regions such as Bang-kok and Toronto, the SMR has limited powers, especially in terms of service delivery. The national government takes the lead in economic, demographic, and spatial planning for the SMR, through the Capital Region Management Committee, chaired by the Prime Minister. At present, the second Capital Region Management Plan 1997-2011, based on the Capital Region Management Act of 1982, establishes basic parameters for the region, e.g., land use and urban form (promoting a multi-nuclei structure), industrial distribution, and national government capital investments. The twenty-five Autonomous Districts undertake their own locally derived projects under a certain scale (e.g., roads less than 20 meters wide, sewage pipes under 900 mm), plus those commissioned by the SMG. The mayor of each District is also elected.
Cooperation between the SMG and surrounding jurisdictions has resulted in positive outcomes, e.g., the establishment of the Capital Region Transport Association, which co-ordinates 397 bus routes carrying 8.8 million riders daily in Seoul, Gyonggi and Inchon. Of particular note is the initiative to improve water quality in the Han River, which flows through Seoul. The Committee for the Management of the Han River Water Quality allocates zero costs to the two furthest upstream jurisdictions (Gangwon, Chungchung), whereas downstream communities share the vast majority of costs, aided by a matching grant from the Korea Water Resources Corporation. In effect, the downstream communities provide upstream jurisdictions with a subsidy for perform-ing environmental services.
From 1998 to 2001, SMG implemented a series of reforms such as the citizen evaluation system, online procedures to handle civil service applications (the open system), and performance based budgeting. The reforms were implemented immediately after the East Asian financial crisis of 1997, when people were receptive to change. The citizen evaluation system (requiring quick internet response from the responsible official) and anti-corruption index were recognized as “the most valuable reform” by the Presiden-tial Commission on Governmental Innovation in Korea.
Metropolitan Seoul indicates that even when the metropolitan area cannot be expanded to keep up with peripheral population expansion and movement of population to suburban and peri-urban areas, coordination of development can be successful. In the Seoul case this coordination was catalyzed by the national government.
Sources: Kim 2004; Metropolis 2006; Soeul Metropolitan Government 2006; Webster et al 2006
106 Annexes
Table 3-12: Allocation of expenditure responsibilities for metropolitan-wide vs. local service provision
FunctionMetro wide
Local Govt
Central Govt Rationale
1
Strategic develop. planning X Externalities
Economic development X Externalities
Tourism promotion & mgmt. X Externalities
2
Regional land use planning X Externalities
Local land plans / allocation X Local access, responsiveness (some externalities)
Titling / provision of tenure X No externalities (possibly scale economies)
3
Social (low income) housing X Redistribution; scale; some externalities
Community upgrading X Local responsiveness; limited externalities
Cultural facilities X X Economies of scale vs. local responsiveness
Libraries X Local responsiveness
Parks and recreation facilities X Local responsiveness
4
Roads and bridges X X X Main (arterial) roads vs. local (street) roads
Public transit X Externalities; economies of scale
Street lighting and cleaning X No (or limited) externalities
5
Police protection/security X X Externalities; economies of scale
Traffic management X Local responsiveness
Basic fire / rescue services X Local responsiveness
Specialized services; training X Scale economies
Ambulance service X Economies of scale; externalities
6
Water supply system X Economies of scale
Drainage/flood protection X Economies of scale; externalities
Piped sewerage system X Economies of scale
Solid waste disposal X Economies of scale (e.g. landfill); externalities
Solid waste collection X Less economies of scale and externalities
7
Education X X Primary and secondary vs. higher education
Public health X X Externalities; redistribution; scale economies
Welfare assistance X X Income redistribution; externalities
8Promotion of major events X Externalities
Business licensing X Local responsiveness
9 Power generation (electricity) X
Source: Based on Slack (2004)
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 107
3.5 Mayor’s Wedge Analysis for Greater KL/KV PBTs
Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL) and Ampang Jaya Municipal Council (MPAJ)
Summary
104. Local authorities (PBTs)21, the unit of institutional analysis for city governments in Malaysia, appear to have a very limited direct role in impacting the competitiveness of their city. Cities worldwide have different degrees of influence in such economic development activities, which relate to both intergovernmental structures and the involvement of stakeholders at the city level. Throughout Malaysia, economic development initiatives are carried out by national agencies, state-level agencies and regional corridor authorities. In addition, in several city-level functions—such as infrastructure and land use and planning—operations and decision-making are spread across levels of government, with limited local government influence. Both Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL) and Ampang Jaya Municipal Council (MPAJ) function as local authorities throughout the country, with DBKL under the Ministry of Federal Territories, and MPAJ under the Selangor state government.
105. The national government has led the targeting of proactive economic interventions in the Greater KL/KV metro area, identifying is as one of its National Key Economic Areas (NKEA) and as part of its Economic Transformation Programme (ETP). This has seen various government agencies tasked to carry out the entry point projects (EPPs) to fulfill the 2020 vision for Kuala Lumpur. DBKL and MPAJ’s roles in these initiatives are limited to areas outside of economic development. Investment attraction and talent formation and attraction are carried out by national agencies, while the city governments have a role for revitalizing the area along the Klang River, greening the city and developing a pedestrian network.
106. Cities worldwide provide different approaches and institutional typologies for tackling the most pressing policy issues of their city or metropolitan area. Seoul and Los Angeles led reforms to reduce automobile congestion and increase public transport use, and in Seoul’s case, revitalize urban areas. Manchester’s success has earned it more responsibilities from an otherwise very centralized U.K. central government. The Manchester Combined Authority also offers a successful example of government collaboration within a metropolitan area.
107. This institutional analysis of DBKL and MPAJ identifies the limited role of city government in economic development and service delivery overall, and it also presents the myriad of institutions at the national and state level that coordinate service delivery in cities. The complexity that arises from this arrangement is being addressed by the Malaysian government, which has done this by creating national agencies around certain government functions and to oversee performance.22 However, it may be the case that greater centralization only increases the current institutional complexity. Cities coordinate and carry out services for both national and state government bodies, and designated national level agencies such as SPAD, InvestKL, and Talent Corp.
3.5.1 The Mayor’s wedge framework: a standardized framework for city governments
108. As a starting point on implementation, the “mayor’s wedge” is defined as the “range of interventions that city leaders can influence, compared to those that are predetermined by higher levels of government” (Competitive Cities Knowledge Base Concept Note). The mayor’s wedge framework is being developed as standardized approach to measuring the role of city governments worldwide, with a particular emphasis on a city’s role in economic development. The city government role is framed through the city’s scope—government powers,
21 Local governments, pihak berkuasa tempatan (PBT) in Malay, are commonly referred to as PBTs.22 PEMANDU, the national delivery unit, is the most obvious example, but the creation of the Land Public Transport Commission (SPAD) for
all levels of government also attests to this.
108 Annexes
functions and funding—and capacity—the financial (systems and processes) and technical (staff expertise) ability to perform its functions.
109. The framework includes city scope components of institutional and economic development context, functional assignments, budget and staffing discretion and expenditures, revenue discretion and politics. A city’s capacity is further disaggregated in terms of human resource management; public financial management; controlling corruption; and building “growth coalitions”. While these are the standardized components, certain scope components such as the political system, and capacity components have not been applied here to the context of the Greater Kuala Lumpur/Klang Valley area governments. Figure 3-2 below is a visualization of the mayor’s wedge framework.
Figure 3 2: The Mayor’s Wedge Framework (scope and capacity)
110. For the Greater Kuala Lumpur/Klang Valley (Greater KL/KV) metropolitan area, the objective is to identify the role of public sector institutions in creating an enabling environment for economic development, and distinguish which of those institutions are at the city or local level as compared to other levels of government. While the mayor’s wedge identifies the role of the city government in particular, it expands to include those public sector actors that carry out economic development if these functions are beyond the city’s administrative remit. Additionally, it is often city actors from the private sector or other stakeholder groups either working with, or in place of, the city government in leading proactive economic development initiatives. The following is the mayor’s wedge analysis of the Greater KL/KV metropolitan area local governments of Kuala Lumpur City Hall (Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur - DBKL) and Ampang Jaya Municipal Council (Majlis Perbandaran Ampang Jaya - MPAJ).
3.5.2 Overview: Greater Kuala Lumpur and Klang Valley PBTs
111. Greater Kuala Lumpur/Klang Valley is composed of 10 local governments, including three city councils and seven municipal councils—these are listed in the graphic below (along with their population) (Ministry of
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 109
Federal Territories).23 Greater KL/KV is within Selangor State; however the Kuala Lumpur and Putrajaya are autonomous federal territories, administered by the Ministry of Federal Territories. Federal territories are administered as local governments, and have almost all of the attributes of PBTs, but differ in that they report directly to the national government24, namely to the Ministry of Federal Territories.
Figure 3-3: Greater Kuala Lumpur/Klang Valley PBTs25
112. While Greater KL/KV has no overarching governance structure for the entire metropolitan area, the territory’s inclusion as a National Key Economic Area (NKEA) outlines several metro area-wide priorities in investment attraction, mass public transportation, and urban regeneration and livability.26 The National Key Economic Areas are part of the national government’s “national transformation program” (NTP)—composed of a “government transformation program” (GTP) and “economic transformation program” (ETP). The Greater KL/KV NKEA initiatives, as noted in the ETP Annual Report (2013), are led by the Ministry of Federal Territories and involve several government agencies and private sector firms. The report states that the NKEA “involves the efforts of more than 40 Government agencies and private sector firms to transform the Greater KL/Klang Valley region into a vibrant, world-class hub for residents and visitors alike to live, work and play (ETP Annual Report 2013: 42).”27
23 The metropolitan area has a total population of about 5.7 million (2010).24 Federal territories are autonomous of their state.25 Source: Official website of Greater Kuala Lumpur/Klang Valley, Ministry of Federal Territories26 This references the entry point projects (EPPs) for Greater KL/KV according to the NKEA. 27 The ETP’s target is for Malaysia to become a high-income country by 2020, through achieving specific goals set out in each of its NKEAs.
110 Annexes
3.5.3 Malaysia’s intergovernmental environment
113. A review of Malaysia’s broad governance environment illustrates that while the country has a federal structure, it is highly centralized. The federal and state governments in Malaysia retain the majority of government resources and decision-making powers. Furthermore, local government bodies must seek the approval of their respective states28 to carry out several of the functions that they are assigned.
Mayor’s wedge typologies – Malaysia, South Africa and Indonesia
114. Malaysian cities may have either of two types of government administration: city halls/councils for large urban centers and municipal councils for large towns. Cities fall in either of the two tiers depending on a combination of population, revenue and economic output criteria (CLGF 2013: 90-91). Other countries, such as South Africa and the Indonesia, also have several local government types—South Africa has metropolitan, district and local municipalities, and Indonesia has cities and districts (Smoke 2013: 61). South Africa follows a model of devolution, with city governments wielding more influence over policy levers and being answerable to their constituents as opposed to higher tiers of government (Smoke 2013: 60). Indonesia has moved from deconcentration to provinces to devolution to cities (Smoke 2013: 62). The chart below compares aspects of the mayor’s wedge for South Africa, Indonesia and Malaysia, discussing decentralization context, policy levers and revenue raising power. Essentially, the countries fall into three typologies, with South Africa having an enlarged mayor’s wedge, Malaysia a constrained mayor’s wedge, and Indonesia falling somewhere in the middle.
Table 3-13: Comparing the mayor’s wedge of South Africa, Indonesia and Malaysia29
South Africa Indonesia Malaysia
Decentralization ContextMetro municipalities are more independent than provinces, metro powers have increased
Devolution to cities since 2001, yet recent reforms have increased role of higher-level government
Deconcentration where city governments implement functions and directives from higher-level government
Policy Levers
Metros have responsibilities in economic promotion, tourism (economic), transport and urban roads (transport), and policing and civil protection (general administration)
Cities provide local business development support, and some set up one stop shops to foster a good investment climate (economic). Most other urban tasks are at the local level, apart from land management and higher education
Cities have no direct role in economic development-related functions (all state or federal government led), nor in policing and/or civil protection (general administration)
Revenue Raising
Metros much more fiscally independent than other local governments, and have a several revenue sources (as opposed to just property tax revenue)
Cities collect several municipal taxes but cannot set tax rates or create new taxes. Devolution has increased city spending autonomy, financed via fiscal transfers. Local taxes have slightly increased
Very little revenue is raised by cities (local governments). Cities have access to local property tax and user fees and charges only (as own-source revenues)
28 Federal territories report instead to the Ministry of Federal Territories.29 Findings for countries from Smoke 2013, CLGF South Africa Country Profile, UCLG Indonesia Country Profile, CLGF Malaysia Country
Profile and UCLG Malaysia Country Profile.
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 111
City government spending, budgeting and staffing discretion
115. Proxies for decentralization to city governments include both the degree to which cities are involved in resource mobilization (this includes local taxation), on the revenue side, and the breadth and depth of their service delivery responsibilities, on the expenditure side (Frank 2014). At the aggregate level, local government spending in Malaysia is rather low as a percentage of total government spending—it stands at less than 5 percent (UCLG 2011: 87). The aggregate local government spending in South Africa stands at 17.4 percent, although metropolitan cities account for 57 percent of municipal spending (UCLG 2011: 336) (Smoke 2013: 66). Indonesia local government spending is 28 percent as a share of total government spending, and 80 percent of this spending comes from cities and districts (UCLG 2011: 87) (Smoke 2013: 66).
116. While Kuala Lumpur City Hall is able to prepare its own budget, it is not able to determine the overall allocations for either its development (capital) expenditures or its operational expenditures. The Economic Planning Unit sets DBKL’s development expenditures, while the Ministry of Finance determines its operational expenditures. DBKL’s budget is approved by the Ministry of Federal Territories. Likewise, MPAJ’s budget is approved by the Selangor State Government. Both DBKL and MPAJ are able to increase their budget spending by borrowing from the state and/or national government, pending higher-level government approval.30 In addition to DBKL and MPAJ having little influence over development expenditures, development expenditures are not adequately aligned with operational expenditures. Thus, PBTs often do not have the necessary increases in operational expenditure financing in order to account for development expenditures.
117. Malaysian cities have a two-tier civil service, with seconded staff from the federal civil service and local civil service staff. Federal civil service staff is paid for and controlled by the federal government, and the local staff is paid from the city budget—this applies to all Malaysian local authorities, thus to both DBKL and MPAJ. However, even for staff paid for from the city budget, staff numbers must be approved by the Public Service Commission (PSC), and also the relevant higher tier of government. For DBKL, appointments to the civil service and the creation of new positions must be approved by the PSC and then by the Ministry of Federal Territories. This is similar in the case of the MPAJ, except that, appointments and the creation of new positions must be approved by the PSC and then the Selangor State Government. The National Institute of Public Administration, an extension of the Public Service Commission, is responsible for the training of all local government staff in Malaysia. South African municipalities develop their own budgets, which are approved at the municipal council level. Budgets and hiring are subject to relevant laws and regulations (Smoke 2013: 76). In Indonesia, cities initially had more autonomy in both budgets and the civil service; however, recent legislation has increased higher-level government control over budgeting and decisions on the civil service (Smoke 2013: 76).
Revenue discretion
118. Malaysian city governments have a limited role in resource mobilization, and similar to expenditure assignments, there is a dependency relationship of cities to higher tier governments. As shown in Table 312, Malaysia is relatively more constrained in its revenue discretion than both South Africa and Indonesia. Tax collection in the Kuala Lumpur jurisdiction is collected by DBKL and the Ministry of Federal territories—DBKL collects the property assessment tax, while the Ministry collects the quit rent property tax. No other taxes, besides the assessment property tax, are raised or administered by the city government, or any city government in Malaysia. MPAJ collects the property assessment in Ampang Jaya while the Selangor State Government collects rent. While city governments formally have the ability to request to set a new tax rate, in practice these requests are always rejected. Tax rates have not been reassessed in the country for decades. The inefficiencies of the property tax system ultimately constrain the own-source revenues of DBKL and MPAJ, which depend heavily on the collection of property taxes.
30 DBKL must seek approval from the Ministry of Federal Territories, while MPAJ must receive Selangor State Government approval.
112 Annexes
119. Local government revenue, as a percentage of total government revenue, is very low in the country, at less than 1 percent (UCLG 2011: 87). This would suggest that most expenditure for cities do not go through the city government budget, but are financed by higher tiers of government. DBKL’s rather low revenue is made up of 90 percent own source revenues (of which 70 percent come from property taxes, and 20 percent from user fees), and 10 percent intergovernmental transfers.
3.5.4 Economic development strategy
120. The National Key Economic Area for Greater KL/KV is the only one with a geographic as opposed to an industry focus31, and this is due to the particular role that cities play in shaping and driving economic development (Economic Transformation Programme 2010: 125). The NKEA functions like the economic development strategy for the city, identifying economic dynamism and livability goals to be achieved by 2020. As aforementioned, these goals are implemented through the entry point projects (EPPs), of which there are nine for the Greater KL/KV NKEA.
121. Several national government agencies are responsible for economic policymaking32 on Greater KL/KV, and this includes the Economic Planning Unit (EPU), the Performance Management Delivery Unit (PEMANDU), the Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI), the Ministry of Finance (MOF), the Malaysian Investment Development Authority (MIDA) and InvestKL (which is under the purview of MITI, PEMANDU and the Ministry of Federal Territories). In terms of the implementation of the Greater KL/KV NKEA, responsibility is shared by InvestKL and TalentCorp on attracting investment and talent, while DBKL and other area local governments have roles in urban regeneration and beautification (ETP Annual Report 2013).
Implementing economic development
122. Malaysia focuses on economic development through focusing on general business environment improvements, targeting specific sectors and prioritizing inventions. The Greater KL/KV NKEA targets the following priority economic sectors: financial services, business services, education, tourism and retail.33 InvestKL was established in 2011 with the mandate to attract 100 multinational corporations (MNCs)—in the priority sectors—to set up regional headquarters in Greater KL/KV by 2020. InvestKL works closely with Talentcorp, the main implementing body of the EPP on attracting external and internal talent, so that it can offer talent with specialized skills for targeted new services industries and for commodities-based industries. Talentcorp works to build a local ecosystem in order to create a large number of jobs, develop a talent attraction program, attracting skilled and qualified Malaysians living abroad, and retain foreign talent currently residing in Malaysia (ETP Annual Report 2013: 28-29).
123. A recent report by Brookings analyzed unemployment of youth and teen adults in the U.S.’s 100 largest metropolitan areas, recognized worsening job prospects from 2000 to 2011 (2014). This of course is an issue among cities worldwide, and one Kuala Lumpur is facing as it looks to build talent to support its labor market demand. Box 3-4 presents the main recommendations from the Brookings report.
31 Malaysia’s NKEAs include: Greater KL/KV, Oil, Gas and Energy, Financial Services, Wholesale and Retail, Palm Oil and Rubber, Tourism, Electrical and Electronics, Business Services, Communications Content and Infrastructure, Education, Agriculture, Healthcare (ETP Annual Report 2013).
32 This includes economic strategies and planning, investment promotions, investment incentives, and monitoring of economic strategies.33 Combined, they contributed to 41% of Greater KL/KV’s GNI in 2009
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 113
124. DBKL and the other local governments of Greater KL/KV appear to have a limited, or perhaps indirect, role in economic development. According to the NKEA, DBKL’s Physical Planning Department drives the planning and implementation of beautification works on the Klang-Gombak River (EPP 5). Additionally, DBKL’s Economic Planning and Development Coordination Department will make recommendations on the development of the land along the river corridor. Ampang Jaya Municipal Council (MPAJ) is tasked with and has reduced oil and grease levels along the portion of the river that falls under its jurisdiction. DBKL leads EPP 6 on a greener Kuala Lumpur, planting and maintaining trees and attempting to increase participation of public and private sector companies in the overall greening effort. DBKL also leads the efforts on identify iconic city attractions (EPP 7) as well as improving pedestrian connectivity (EPP 8) (ETP Annual Report 2013: 33-39).
114 Annexes
3.5.5 City service delivery
125. Service provision in Malaysia is largely held at the federal government level and this is exclusively the case on areas such as general administration (policing, criminal justice), education (pre-school to higher education), and health (primary care and hospitals) (CLGF 2013: 92). Service areas including urban transport and housing and urban planning have greater involvement of city administrations; economic planning (strategies, investment promotion, investment incentives and monitoring) falls entirely outside of the city government’s scope (CLGF 2013: 92). There are differences between DBKL and MPAJ, however, as DBKL shares its responsibilities with federal agencies—particularly the Ministry of Federal Territories—and MPAJ shares responsibilities both with federal and Selangor state government agencies.
126. The federal government united public transportation under one roof in 2010, by creating the Land Public Transport Commission (SPAD). SPAD comes directly under the purview of the Prime Minister and designs the policies, planning and regulating of all aspects of train, bus and taxi services, as well as road and rail-based
Box 3-4 Selected recommendations for teen and young adult unemployment in U.S. cities
Enrich high school and college education with work-based learning opportunities and expand apprenticeships › Work-based learning provides a practical and applied setting for students to learn employability skills (e.g. problem-solving, communication), highlight the relevance of education, and provide students networks to employers and employment that they would otherwise not be able to access.
› Examples: • The Christo Rey Network of high schools places students in “work-study” programs during their academic year. • U.S. States Wisconsin and Georgia have created youth apprenticeship programs for their high school students, linking
together high schools, businesses and community colleges.
Link high schools to post-secondary education › About two-thirds of 24 to 29 year olds do not have either two or four year post-secondary education credentials. Dual enroll-ment and early college programs allow students to take college classes in high school, and increase the likelihood that they will continue on to college.
› Examples: • Launched in 2002, the Early College High School Initiative has created and modified 240 high schools nationwide to blend
high school and college into one rigorous program.• North Carolina’s Career and College Promise program creates several alternatives for high school students to earn college
credit, also including paths to transfer to four-year degree programs.
Increase the emphasis on career and technical education, career counseling and job placement › This refers to better preparing and planning for high school students to directly start in the entry-level workforce, such as through attaining the necessary workplace skills in high school.
› Examples:• Jobs for America’s Graduates (JAG) provides students at risk of dropping out with help to graduate from high school, enroll
in post secondary education, and/or find a job.• Year Up, a program in 12 cities across the United States, provides training on information technology skills and college
credits to young adults ages 18-24.
Provide those who have dropped out opportunities to get a high school diploma and access to post-secondary education › Example: • Gateway to College programs are found at community colleges around the U.S. work with young adults ages 16-21, to help
them earn a diploma and/or college credits, while providing a very supportive environment.
Source: Brookings 2014
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 115
freight transport (SPAD).34 SPAD designs policy and planning for bus network and stations, rail network and stations, taxis and other land transport for the DBKL and MPAJ jurisdictions. It is also responsible for the NKEA priorities on a High Speed Rail to connect Kuala Lumpur to Singapore, and on coordinating with Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) Corp (created in 2011) in order to integrate existing rail networks and transit and develop a new MRT system for Greater KL/KV.
127. One of Kuala Lumpur’s transportation issues is the emphasis on automobile use as opposed to mass transit. Besides the implications this has on traffic congestion and the environment, this underutilizes the effects of agglomeration at the city level and the economic benefits created by dense urban networks. Box 3-5 describes the experiences of Los Angeles and Seoul in addressing the challenges caused by extensive car use, and increasing urban density.
128. While not applicable to Greater KL/KV, Malaysia has elsewhere in the country established Regional Corridor authorities, such as with the Iskandar Development Region (IRDA) authority. The box below discusses the Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA), which has been successful in uniting several service delivery functions under one institution while streamlining as opposed to adding complexity to governance arrangements. The GMCA in many ways is moving towards the Greater London Authority in assuming more strategic functions for its metropolitan area (Wilcox et. al. 2014). Cities receiving more authority—if they can “prove their worth”—remains a novel concept for the United Kingdom, as the U.K. is considered “one of the most centralized OECD countries” (BBC 27 January 2014) (Wilcox et. al. 2014: 2)35. Indeed, Manchester ranks among the “least powerful” cities in the European Union index of city power, scoring low in several indicators similar to those included in this mayor’s wedge framework (European Union 2007: A5).36
34 Available at: http://www.spad.gov.my/about-us/what-we-do.35 Available at: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-2590923836 The European Union’s index of city power is a weighted index based on: city population (2001), administrative structure, expenditure per
resident, local expenditure as a percentage of total expenditure, proportion of local income from local taxation and local government tax receipts as a percentage of member state receipts.
116 Annexes
Box 3-5 Polycentricity and public transport: Los Angeles and Seoul
What do Los Angeles and Seoul have in common? Both cities are world leaders in population density, and density takes a polycentric form in the two cities—increasing the likelihood of driving and automobile dependency, as opposed to transit use. Residents are forced to visit multiple locations to run multiple errands, as opposed to accomplishing multiple errands at a single location (Rand 2008: xxxiii).
Los Angeles was built around the car, offering a stark contrast to U.S. cities like New York and Chicago, which had much more concentrated urban density. However, while Los Angeles has an identity for sprawling development, it is quite densely populated at the regional level. The cities’ surrounding suburbs are much denser than those of other cities. Compounding this issue for Los Angeles, a 2007 study found that jobs in the region are decentralizing over time, with employment clusters increasing by 10-15% from 1980 and 2000, and jobs in downtown Los Angeles decreasing by 20% during the same time period (Rand 2008: 63). Figure 34 below presents the density of jobs versus parking spaces per job (among central business districts of major world cities), to reinforce the argument that “A big reason Angelenos drive everywhere is that they can park everywhere, generally free” (Rand 2008: 74). Figure 35 looks at the relationship between high-speed transit and population per square mile, suggesting a positive relationship between dense metropolitan regions and high-speed transit options and that Los Angeles may be lagging in this regard (Rand 2008: 70).
Figure 3-4: Density compared to two transit factors(a) Density of Jobs versus Parking Spaces per Job (Central business districts of major world cities);
(b) Population Density and High Speed Transit Density (Major U.S. Metro Areas)
Tackling these issues requires that Los Angeles continue to employ a combination of strategies, which include land-use reforms related to zoning, density, parking supply and the mixing of uses, and major infrastructure investments to improve transit options (Rand 2008: xx). Los Angeles has employed significant capital investments in infrastructure in the last few years, pursuing devel-opment along new transit options. Metro Rapid, the city’s BRT line, has achieved success in ridership along its corridor, but is yet to attract major corridor development. The LA Metro Gold Line, however, has seen strong developer interest and is increasingly a destination for future housing and mixed-use development (TCRP 2004: 430-434). The city will need to continue to connect major employment clusters to the rapid transit network and improve intermodal connections between light rail, subway and bus, and at the same time re-zone areas around transit stops for increased development (CTOD 2010: 61) (TCRP 2004: 434).
Source: Brookings 2014
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 117
129. Neither DBKL nor MPAJ is responsible for designing their economic strategies, investment promotion, offering investment incentives and or monitoring their economic strategies.
» For DBKL:
• The Economic Planning Unit (EPU) carries out economic strategies and planning, • MITI, MIDA and InvestKL lead Investment promotion, • MOF and MIDA offer investment incentives, and,• PEMANDU monitors economic strategies.37
» For MPAJ, economic development is under the purview of both federal and Selangor state agencies.
• The Economic Planning Unit (EPU) as well as the State Economic Planning Unit (UPEN) carry out economic strategies and planning,
• MITI, MIDA, InvestKL as well as the Selangor State Investment Corporation lead Investment promotion, • MOF, MIDA and the Selangor State Government offer investment incentives, and • PEMANDU as well as the State Government monitor economic strategies.
37 All of these are federal agencies.
Box 3-5 Continued
Seoul experienced rapid economic growth and urbanization in the second half of the 20th century, going from a population of 1.6 million in 1955 to 10.6 million in 1990. The number of registered cars in the city also substantially increased, from 27,000 in 1967 to 2.9 million in 2008. Decentralization efforts from 1990 to 2005 sought to reduce the population increase, and relieve the city of its problems of overconcentration (Kim & Han 2011: 146-147). Korea adopted a national government act, the Capital Region Readjustment plan, which limited the establishment of new factories and new universities in the Capital Region and promoted the building of urban sub-centers (Kim & Han 2011: 147). In terms of the latter, 26 new towns were built in the Seoul Metropolitan Area in the last three decades, increasing the usage of cars and demand for highway infrastructure (World Bank 2013: 64). Seoul has a road network of 8093 km as of 2008, and its subway network coverers 64.4% of its territory (Kim & Han 2011: 147). Notwithstanding the extensive public transit network, job concentration in districts throughout the Seoul region, and excessive development around Seoul, led to long distance commuting and increased car usage, causing traffic congestion and pollution (Kim & Han 2011: 152).
Mayor Myung-bak Lee, Seoul mayor from 2002-2006, sought to “make a city where people come first, not cars” (World Bank 2013: 66). His administration did this by removing highways in the city center, and regenerating the areas for public use. Seoul also encouraged households to settle in the central city and redevelopment districts, reversing the flow of residents to Seoul’s outskirts and beyond. The city offered transit options to offset the decreased roadway capacity, partly by extending subway lines and, more importantly, opening seven new lines for median-lane buses (as part of its BRT network) (World Bank 2013: 66-67). Bus operating speeds in the city have nearly doubled as a result, reaching 21 kilometers per hour. BRT buses have been more reliable than those on nonexclusive lanes (in terms of traffic time variation) and ridership on BRT buses increased 60% faster than that for non-BRT buses (from 2004 to 2005). Other significant transit transformations included introducing a semi-public transit organization to enforce rules and standards on bus routes, schedules and private operating practices. A smart fare card was introduced to allow for integrated bus-rail fares and efficient distance-based pricing (World Bank 2013: 68).
Land markets responded to the BRT investments, intensifying land uses along BRT corridors and mainly converting single-family residences to multi-family units and mixed-use projects. Land price premiums were observed within 300 meters of BRT stops and prices as well as development increased along high-amenity corridors. The concentration of high-value-added industries, employ-ing a “creative class”, increased in the converted areas and the “freeway-to-greenway” initiatives reflected indirect environment benefits (World Bank 2013: 68-69).
118 Annexes
Regional authority typologies for local service provision in the UK
The United Kingdom has recently instituted two programs of regional coordination, uniting local governments in regions around certain service delivery functions. There are 39 Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) that cover all English local authorities. LEPs are meant to provide strategic leadership in local economic priorities. Figure 3-6 shows the geography of the 39 LEPs. As a more formal alternative, Combined Authorities are legal bodies that can be set up by two or more contiguous local authorities. The box below presents the two institutional alternatives.
Box 3-6 Greater Manchester Combined Authority
Manchester is emerging as a viable alternative to London in the areas of services, culture and arts (European Union 2007: 65). The city is famously known as one of the main trade centers of the Industrial Revolution, becoming home to a thriving textile economy and then one based on heavy industry in the 1970s. The city faced decline in both textiles and heavy industry, but experienced resurgence thanks to significant public and private investment, council leadership and, importantly, the close collab-oration of the metropolitan area’s ten local authorities. This collaboration has undergone several iterations, first as a city region and most recently as a combined authority. While it has endured and been relatively successful, regional coordination has had a number of difficulties including appearing overly complex (and difficult to engage with) to the public, and political disagreements between different local authority councils stalling joint decisions and initiatives (World Bank 2008).
The Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA) was established in 2011 to cover ten local authorities (see the figure below on Greater Manchester). The GMCA works with its constituent authorities in a set of powers and responsibilities in eco-nomic development and transport. This includes for example developing a Greater Manchester Strategy, an economic strategy, and establishing Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM) as GMCA’s executive body with respect to transport functions (Smith July 2012). The GMCA, TfGM and other Greater Manchester institutions have clearly defined roles that are based on agreements between the area local authorities. Notable achievements for GMCA include: major refurbishment of the Bolton and Rochdale railway stations as part a city region transport investment program; raising an annual “Revolving Infrastructure Fund” worth £30 million and permission for the building of up to 7,000 new homes by 2017. It is also a testament to the GMCA’s success that London-style powers are now being recommended to Manchester, as the first U.K. city to follow London’s regional government model (Wilcox et. al. 2014: 11).
Figure 3-5: Greater Manchester
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 119
3.5.6 Business regulations and licensing
130. Malaysia ranks among the top countries in the World Bank Group’s Doing Business survey, showcasing its continued emphasis on maintaining a superior general business environment. Malaysia’s regional comparator economies also perform very well. At 18th worldwide in ease of doing business, Malaysia is behind Singapore which ranks first, Hong Kong which ranks third and Korea which ranks fifth (World Bank 2014: 8). Starting a business is done through the Companies Commission of Malaysia one-stop shop, a national agency under the Ministry of Domestic Trade, Cooperatives and Consumerism (World Bank 2014: 20). Development approval, or obtaining a construction permit, is carried out through an application at a One Stop Center (OSC)—every local government in Malaysia should have its own OSC. The OSC refers approval submissions to all necessary government departments, including the Planning Department, Building Department, Engineering Department, Fire and Rescue Department, Sewerage Agency and Water Agency. Kuala Lumpur City Hall’s One Stop Center manages this process in Malaysia’s capital (World Bank 2014: 27-30).
131. DBKL, MPAJ, as well as all Malaysia local governments, have responsibility over zoning and land use regulations. However, land titles are granted by land offices at higher tiers of government—the Ministry of Federal Territories for DBKL and Selangor State Government for MPAJ. Kuala Lumpur has also been able to perform rather well in terms of urban regeneration, through its repurposing of land throughout the city. Most notably this has included redeveloping the city center and revitalizing the area along the Klang River, with the latter efforts aimed at creating a waterfront of high economic value.
Box 3-7 Regional arrangements for local authorities in the UK
Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) were created in 2010, in order to “provide the strategic leadership in their areas to set out local economic priorities” and “create the right environment for business and growth” (Bolton June 2012). LEPs are informal structures governed by a board of volunteers, which includes a private sector chair and members from local authorities, business based in the LEP area, public bodies including universities and third sector representatives. LEPs now receive grant funding by the central government in order to identify and carry out their objectives. Figure 3-6, to the right, represents the 39 local enterprise partnerships (Bolton June 2012).
Combined authorities are formal regional bodies encom-passing two or more local authorities (and usually coincid-ing with a natural economic area) that wish to collaborate closely on economic development and transport-related initiatives. Combined authorities are assigned functions by their constituent local authorities, in the areas of eco-nomic development, regeneration and integrated public transport. Among the intended benefits of such structures are: improved alignment, coordination and delivery of economic development and transport-related initiatives, as well as a means of steering significant streams of work (Smith July 2012). According to the Centre for Cities, the combined authorities are an effective route to implemented economic development policies at a spatial scale that matches cities’ economic footprints—as this spatial scale often covers more than one local authority (Smith 2012).
Figure 3-6: LEPs in the UK
120 Annexes
3.6 Examples of Formulae for Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfers
3.6.1 Formulae for Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfers in Australia
Background: Federal-State Financial Relations
132. Australia is notable for the centralization of revenue-raising and a comprehensive system of intergovernmental fiscal transfers. To address both vertical and horizontal fiscal imbalances, the federal government makes a large amount of intergovernmental transfers. The bulk of transfers are from the federal government to state governments. Local government, the third tier of government, is a state responsibility and has the service delivery and revenue raising powers given to it by the states38. The federal government collects 81 percent of all government revenue but is responsible for only 61 percent of outlays, while states collect 17 percent of revenue and incur 33 percent of outlays (CGC 2008).
133. Fiscal transfers are administered by Australia’s Commonwealth Grants Commission (CGC), an independent statutory advisory body established in 1933. CGC members are appointed by the federal government. The Commission makes recommendations in consultation with the federal government and the states. It aims to ensure that each state has the fiscal capacity to provide the same standard quality of public services39. Three equalization pillars are used to achieve equalization: reflect what States collectively do, be policy neutral and be practical (Morris and others 2004). The Commission reviews the methodology for transfers and make adjustments every five years.
134. The major reform of Australian federal fiscal relations happened in 2000. With the introduction of the goods and services tax (GST) and a new intergovernmental agreement (IGA 2000), certain state taxes were abolished. All revenue from the GST would be shared among the states on the basis of horizontal fiscal equalization. GST became the main source of general revenue assistance from the federal government to the states (CGC 2008).
135. Fiscal transfers take two main forms (Commonwealth of Australia 2015):
A. General Revenue Assistance: untied monthly funding that the states may use as they see fit. Over 98% of general revenue assistance is the allocation of GST revenue, which is based on a comprehensive formula. Other general revenue assistance includes payments to the Australian Capital Territory, and royalty pay-ments to Western Australia and Northern Territory.
B. Specific Payments: including specific purpose payments (SPPs) and national partnership payments (NPPs) sourced from the national budget to achieve national aims or provide funds for particular purposes. The SPPs mainly support services of workforce development, health and housing. They are distributed amongst the states in accordance with population shares of that year and the growth in services provision activity such as hospital and school services in that jurisdiction. The NPPs facilitate reforms or specified projects, where payments are aligned with project achievements.
136. In 2015-2016, the federal government is providing the states with A$107.7 billion in total payments, accounting for around 5.8% of GDP and 45% of state revenues (Commonwealth of Australia 2015). The total payments include specific payments of $50 billion and general revenue assistance of $57.7 billion.
38 Local governments are responsible for services such as local roads, building standards and waste disposal. They raise revenue through rates on property in their jurisdiction and various fees and fines. Transfers from the federal government to municipal governments are channeled through the states (Searle 2002: p17-18).
39 The transfers aim to equalize State fiscal capacities, not the actual fiscal outcomes because States choose to provide different levels of service, impose different tax rates or acquire different levels of assets. (CCG 2015)
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 121
Formulae Used for Transfers
137. Fiscal equalization in Australia aims to achieve a situation where, after distributing the GST, each state has the fiscal capacity to provide the same services, charge the same taxes and achieve the same per capita budget result (CGC 2014a). Since states differ in fiscal circumstances such as size of the tax base and the unit cost of providing services, the actual GST entitlement of each state varies.
138. According to the Commonwealth of Australia’s Update Report (2014b), a state’s GST allocation is calculated as:
assessed GST requirementi=assessed expensesi + assessed investmenti + assessed lendingi
- assessed revenuei - other paymentsi
» assessed expenses: the expenses state i would incur to provide average services. It is the sum of 11 categories of expenses that the Commission defines that all states incur to provide general services. Each category assessed expenses is estimated by multiplying the national average expense per capita by its category disability factor and its population. The disability factor is calculated by relating its position to the average position40.
» assessed investment: the investment state i would make to have the infrastructure required to provide average services. It is calculated by subtracting the assessed level of infrastructure required at the start of the year from the assessed level of infrastructure required at the end of the year and multiplying the result by the state’s unit cost disability41.
» assessed net lending: the net lending state i would make to finish the year with the average per capita net financial assets. It is calculated by subtracting the state’s population share of the total net financial worth at the start of the year from its population share of total net financial worth at the end of the year.
» assessed revenue: the revenue state i would raise if it made the average revenue raising effort. It is the sum of assessed revenue for seven categories that the Commission determines as revenue sources in the estimation42. For each category, it is calculated by multiplying the national average tax rate and the state’s tax base.
» other payments: revenue from Commonwealth payments including SPPs and NPPs.
139. The calculation is compiled using data from the annual operating statements of the states’ general government sectors sourced from the ABS Government Finance Statistics.
40 For service delivery expenses component, if the proportion of a state’s population aged 15 to 64 is 10% above the average, it is assumed the state’s per capita expenses on vocational education would be 10% above average. The disability factor for a category is estimated combining each component. Factors are added if they are independent and multiplied if they interact (CGC 2014b).
41 The disability here is estimated in a similar way with expense disability factor, by relating its position to the national average position.42 The categories for revenue include payroll tax, land tax, stamp duty on conveyances, insurance tax, motor taxes, mining revenue and
other revenue (CGC 2014b).
122 Annexes
3.6.2 Formulae for Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfers in Indonesia
140. Intergovernmental fiscal transfers in Indonesia consist of three main components: Dana Alokasi Umum (DAU), Dana Alokasi Khusus (DAK) and Dana Bagi Hasil (DBH). DAU and DBH are unconditional grants, while DAK finances subnational projects based on national priorities. DAU and DAK are formula-based transfers; DBH is based on fixed percentage shares. Transfers from the central government are still the largest source of revenues for subnational governments in Indonesia.
Dana Alokasi Umum (DAU)
141. DAU aims to balance the fiscal capacities of subnational governments. It is transferred directly to subnational governments on a monthly basis, and subnationals have complete discretion over the use of DAU received.
142. According to Law 33 (2004), DAU should be provided in a “proportionate, democratic, fair and transparent manner” by taking into account “local potential (fiscal capacity and conditions and local needs)” (Shah and others 2012). The grant allocation is calculated as the sum of a basic allocation (PWBA) and a fiscal gap allocation (FG).
DAUi = Basic Allocationi + Fiscal Gap Allocationi
» Basic Allocation (PWBA): funds a portion of the subnational government’s civil servant wage bill43. It is allocated by the relative percentage share of each local government or provincial government in the total actual bill. Mathematically it is calculated as:
PWBAi = (Wage Billi / Total Wage Bill) * (Total DAU PWBA)
» Fiscal Gap Allocation (FG): the estimated difference between a subnational government’s fiscal needs and its fiscal capacity:
Fiscal Gap Allocationi = Fiscal needsi — Fiscal Capacityi
» Fiscal needs (EN) is calculated by multiplying a composite index by the average aggregate spending. The index is developed based on relative population, relative area, relative construction price index, inverse of human development index, and inverse of relative nominal per capita GRDP (gross regional domestic product). The weights for the above mentioned factors are assigned to achieve a given numerical value for the Williamson’s Index44, as shown in Table 1 (Shah and others 2012).
Fiscal Needsi = average fiscal needs * composite indexi
» Fiscal capacity (FC) is the sum of weighted own-source revenues, non-resource tax sharing as well as resource and mining tax sharing45. The weights for individual revenue sources are assigned to achieve a given numerical value for the Williamson’s Index for each year. Table 1 provides the index values for the year 2011 (Shah and others 2012).
Fiscal Capacityi = ∑ ( Rij * Ij)
43 The wage bill variable in the equation uses the actual wage bill from the previous year.44 Williamson’s Index is a regional inequality index developed by JG Williamson (1965). It is an aggregate measure of the dispersion
of regional levels of per capita income about the national mean. Each regional observation is weighted by its share in the national population.
45 Rij is jurisdiction i’s amount of revenue from source j. Ij is the composite index for source of revenue j.
R_i^j is jurisdiction i’s amount of revenue from source j. I^j is the composite index for source of revenue j.
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 123
Table 3-14: DAU Variable Weights, 2011
Province Cities/Districts
DAU (2011) variable weight
Fiscal Need Variables
Population 30.00% 30.00%
Area 15.00% 13.50%
Construction price index 30.00% 30.00%
Inverse of human development index 10.00% 10.00%
Index of Inverse per capita GRDP 15.00% 16.50%
Fiscal Capacity Variables
Own-source revenue 50.00% 93.00%
Tax revenue 80.00% 80.00%
Resource sharing 95.00% 63.00%
Source: Ministry of Finance, Government of Indonesia, cited in Shah et al. 2012
Dana Alokasi Khusus (DAK)
143. DAK is a capital grant sourced from the national budget (Anggaran Pendapatan dan Belanja Negara, APBN) and finances subnational projects that the central government deems are of national priority. DAK funds capital spending and cannot be used for research, training, administration, or official travel. DAK accounts for around 5% of the national budget and funds activities across 22 sectors. Funds are transferred each year in three tranches. The first tranche depends on a subnational government’s submission of its budget to the central government, and the latter two tranches depend on the depletion of funds from the previous tranche. (World Bank 2012)
144. The allocation of DAK is a two-fold process. First, there is a system for determining a subnational government’s eligibility to receive DAK, based on fiscal capacity, regional characteristics and special criteria such as regional autonomy and disadvantaged regions, as shown in Figure 1.
145. Second, once eligibility for DAK is established, the atual allocation is based on a comprehensive formula. The total DAK allocation that subnational government i receives from the central government is the sum of DAK allocated for each sector (e.g. education, health, agriculture, etc.) for that subnational government. The DAK that subnational government i receives for sector j is calculated by multiplying its weighted share by the total DAK allocated to the sector. Mathematically the process is presented as below (Ministry of Finance 2015):
DAK allocationi = DAKieducation + DAKi
health + DAKiagriculture + ⋯ + DAKi
trade
Weightingij = (0.8 * technical indicatori
j + 0.2 * fiscal & regional indexij ) * construction cost indexi
j
= (0.8 * ITij + 0.2 * IFWi
j ) * IKKij
� � Weightingi
j
∑WeightingjDAK allocationi
j = * Total DAK for sector j
R_i^j is jurisdiction i’s amount of revenue from source j. I^j is the composite index for source of revenue j.
124 Annexes
» Weighting: is determined by subnational government i’s technical indicator, fiscal and regional index and construction cost index. ∑Weightingj is the total weighting of all eligible subnational governments in sector j.
» Technical indicator (IT): reflects the condition of infrastructure in sector j in subnational government i. It is determined by summing up individual weighted component scores that are determined by the relevant national government line ministry46.
» Fiscal and Regional index (IFW): the combination of fiscal capacity index (IFN) and regional index (IKW).
» Fiscal capacity index (IFN) is the ratio of a subnational government’s fiscal capacity to the national average fiscal capacity. A subnational government’s fiscal capacity is calculated by subtracting its wage bill for civil servants from the sum of its own-source revenue and all other transfers received from the central government.
» The regional index (IKW) is a composite of indices that take account the status of certain subnational governments that are “lagging’, in border areas, or remote islands.
IFW = 0.5IFN-1 + 0.5IKW
fiscal capacityi = own – source revenuei + DAUi + DBHi – wage billi
» Construction cost index (IKK): reflects varying levels of the costs of construction across the country. The index for each jurisdiction is determined by the Ministry of Public Works based on recent actual data of the value of construction contracts for civil works across all provinces.
Dana Bagi Hasil (DBH)
146. DBH is the mechanism for revenue sharing. The central government raises revenue and returns part of this revenue by allocating a predefined share of revenues to the originating jurisdiction. Distributions are by provincial point of origin; producing districts within provinces receive larger portions than non-producing districts. Subnational governments have total discretion over the use of allocated funds (World Bank 2012). These transfers accounted for 25 percent of total central transfers in 2010 and financed 20 percent of subnational expenditures (Shah and others 2012).
147. DBH includes both shared tax and non-tax revenues. Shared tax revenue comes from property tax, taxes on the transfer of property titles and personal income tax. Non-tax revenue sharing is based on revenues from natural resources, including oil, natural gas and geothermal energy, mining, forestry and fisheries. For each type of revenue, the central government and subnational government share in accordance to predefined percentages. For instance, DBH from general mining is shared between central, provincial, and local governments at 20 percent, 16 percent, and 64 percent, respectively (Dyah 2012).
46 For example, IT for education sector is determined by components such as classroom conditions, school toilet conditions, etc. Each component is scored by the relevant national line ministry.
(� )fiscal capacityi
Number of eligible regionsIFNi = fiscal capacityi/
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 125
Figure 3-7: Allocation Process for DAK
Source: Ministry of Finance 2015; SMERU Research Institute 2008
3.7 Annex 3 References
Abbott, J. 2011. “Regions of cities: Metropolitan governance and planning in Australia”, in Xu, J., Yeh A., editors, Gover-nance and Planning of Mega-City Regions – An international comparative perspective. Routledge, New York, p 172-190
Adi, P.H. 2005. “The Impact of Fiscal Decentralization on Economics Growth”. Journal of Interdisciplines. Satya Wacana Christian University. Volume XVII Number 2-3. August. (National Accredited).
Alfsen-Norodom, C. 2004. “Managing the Megacity for Global Sustainability: The New York Metropolitan Region as an Urban Biosphere Reserve.” Annals of the New York Academy of Science, vol. 1023, pp. 125-141.
Andersson, M. 2012. “Metropolitan Management – Approaches and Implications”. Available at: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTURBANDEVELOPMENT/Resources/336387-1369969101352/Andersson.pdf
Ballaguer-Coll, T., Prior, D., Tortosa-Ausina, E. 2006. “Decentralization and Efficiency in Spanish Local Government”. (Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Economicas 2006)
BBC. UK. n.d. “One of most centralized OECD countries”. 27 January 2014. Available at: http://www.bbc.com/news/busi-ness-25909238 (Retrieved October 2014).
Technical Weighting
IT*IKK
Regional WeightingIFW*IKK
DAK for sector jDAKi
j = (BDij / ∑j BDi
j ) * Total DAK
Ineligiblefor this sector
Ineligible
Yes
* 0.8 * 0.2
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
(General Criteria)Fiscal Capacity IFN
(Special Criteria)Fiscal and Regional
Index IFW <1
(Special Criteria)PAPUA Special
Autonomy & Disadvantaged Regions
Ineligible Technical Indicator IT>0 Construction Cost Index IKK
DAK WeightingBDi
j = IKK (0.8*IFW+0.2*IT)
Fiscal and RegionalIndex
Fiscal Capacity Index IFN
RegionalIndex
126 Annexes
Bird, Richard M., and Michael Smart. 2002. “Intergovernmental fiscal transfers: International lessons for developing countries.” World Development 30 (6): 899-912.
Bolton, T. 2011. “Local Enterprise Partnerships: A Great LEP forward?” Centre for Cities. June 2012.
Brinkhoff, T. 2011. “The Principal Agglomerations of the World”. Available at: www.citypopulation.de
Cantarero, D. and Pascual, M. 2008. “Analysing the impact of fiscal decentralization on health outcomes: empirical evi-dence from Spain” (Applied Economics Letter 2008)
Central Intelligence Agency. N.d. “The World Factbook”. Available at: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/id.html
Center for Transit-Oriented Development. 2010.”Creating Successful Transit-Oriented Districts in Los Angeles: A Citywide Toolkit for Achieving Regional Goals”. February 2010.
Civic Alliance. 2006. “About Civic Alliance, Regional Planning Association”. Available at: www.civicalliance.org
Commonwealth of Australia. 2015. Budget Paper No. 3 - Federal Financial Relations 2015-2016. Canberra.
Commonwealth Grants Commission. 2008.The Last 25 Years. Canberra.
Commonwealth Grants Commission. 2014a. Report on GST Revenue Sharing Relatives 2014 Update. Canberra.
Commonwealth Grants Commission. 2014b.The GST Distribution Model – A Mathematical Presentation. Canberra: Com-monwealth Grants Commission
Commonwealth Grants Commission. 2015. Report on state revenue sharing relativities: 2015 Review (Draft). Supporting information. Canberra.
Commonwealth Local Government Forum. 2013. “Country Profile: Malaysia”. Available at: http://www.clgf.org.uk/malay-sia/ (retrieved October 2014).
Commonwealth Local Government Forum. 2013 “Country Profile: South Africa”. Available at: http://www.clgf.org.uk/south-africa/ (retrieved October 2014).
Dodge, W.R. 1996. “Regional Excellence – Governing Together to Compete Globally and Flourish Locally”. National League of Cities, Washington, DC
Dyah, S. M. 2012. The impacts of fiscal decentralization on income inequality in Indonesia. Elias, E.E. 1997. “Fiscal Decen-tralization and Municipal Governance in Mexico The case of Chihuahua”.
European Commission. 2007. “State of European Cities Report: Adding value to the European Urban Audit”.
Frank, J. 2014. “Governance and Inclusive Institutions Directorate Briefing Notes”. Governance Across Levels of Govern-ment. The World Bank, Washington, DC
Greater Vancouver Regional District. 2006. “About GVRD”. Available at: http://www.gvrd.bc.ca
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 127
Imron, A. 2011. “Regional Autonomy Proliferation of Region and Pseudo Local Government in Indonesia”. (Aug 2011)
Intergovernmental Agreement on a National Water Initiative. (2009). Intergovernmental Agreement on Federal Financial Relations. Schedule D: Payment Arrangements.
Kajian Pengeluaran Publik Indonesia. 2007. “Review of Indonesian Public Expenditure 2007”. Avilable at: http://sitere-sources.worldbank.org/INTINDONESIA/Resources/226271-1168333550999/PERHBAB7DesentralisasiFiskalKesenjan-ganDaerah.pdf
Kim, B-J. 2004. “An Assessment of Seoul Metropolitan Government Reform Strategies”. International Review of Public Administration, vol.8, no.2, pp.77-89
Kim, H.M. and Sun, S. H. 2011. “City profile: Seoul”. Cities. 13 July 2011.
Klink, J. 2007. “Recent Perspectives on Metropolitan Organization, Functions, and Governance”, in Rojas, E., Cuadra-do-Roura J.R., Güell, J.M.F., editors. Governing the Metropolis - Principles and Cases, Inter-American Development Bank, Washington, DC. p. 77-134
Land Public Transport Commission. N.d. “About SPAD”. Available at: http://www.spad.gov.my/about-us/what-we-do (retrieved October 2014).
Laquian, A. 2005. “Beyond Metropolis – The Planning and Governance of Asia’s Mega-Urban Regions”. Woodrow Wilson Center Press, Washington, DC and The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.
Ma, Jun. 1997. Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfer: A Comparison of Nine Countries:(cases of the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia, Germany, Japan, Korea, India, and Indonesia). World bank, 1997.
McCarthy, L. 2011. “Mega-city regional cooperation in the United States and Western Europe - A comparative perspec-tive”, in Xu, J., Yeh A., editors, Governance and Planning of Mega-City Regions – An international comparative perspective. Routledge, New York. p 148-171
Metropolis. 2006. “Seoul Metropolitan Region Profile”. Available at: http://www.metropolis.org/index.asp
Ministry of Federal Territories. N.d. “Official Website of Greater Kuala Lumpur/Klang Valley”. Available at: http://app.kwpkb.gov.my/greaterklkv (retrieved October 2014).
Ministry of Finance. 2015. Modul Pengalokasian Dana Alokasi Khusus (DAK) Tahun 2015. Jakarta: Subdirektorat Dana Alo-kasi Khusus, Direktorat Dana Perimbangan, Direktorat Jenderal Perimbangan Keuangan, Kementerian Keuangan Republik Indonesia.
Moreno, F. 2013. “Fiscal Decentralization in Rural Local Governments in Mexico: Changes in Accountability and Entrepre-neurship in the Local Government Structures”
Morris, A. G., Wiltshire, K. W., Rolfe, H. A., Early, L. J., Williams, R. A., & Nicholas, M. A. 2004. Report on state revenue sharing relativities: 2004 Review. Supporting information.
Oakerson, R.J. 2004. “The Study of Metropolitan Governance”, in Feiock, R.C., editor, Metropolitan Governance – Conflict, Competition, and Cooperation. Georgetown University Press, Washington, DC. p 17-45
128 Annexes
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). 2006. “The Governance of Metro-Regions”, in Com-petitive Cities in the Global Economy, OECD Publishing, Paris (and related OECD Territorial Reviews)
Pena, P. 2009. “Evaluation of the Effect Decentralization on Educational Outcomes in Spain”. Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona.
Performance Management and Delivery Unit (PEMANDU). 2014. “Economic Transformation Programme”. Annual Report 2013. Performance Management and Delivery Unit, Manila.
Performance Management and Delivery Unit (PEMANDU). 2010. “Economic Transformation Programme. A Roadmap for Malaysia”. Performance Management and Delivery Unit, Manila.
Post, S.S. 2004. “Metropolitan Area Governance and Institutional Collective Action”, in Feiock, R.C., editor, Metropolitan Governance – Conflict, Competition, and Cooperation, Georgetown University Press, Washington, DC. p.67-92
Raich, U. 2008. “Unequal Development–Decentralization and Metropolitan Finance in Mexico City”. VDM Verlag Dr. Muller Aktiengesellschaft & Co. KG, Germany
Regional Planning Association. 2006. “About RPA”. Available at: www.rpa.org
Rodriguez, V. 1987. “The Politics of Decentralization in Mexico: Divergent Outcomes of Policy Implementation”.
Resosudarmo, I.A.P. 2004. “Closer to People and Trees: Will Decentralization Work for the People and the Forest of Indo-nesia?” European Journal of Development Research. Spring 2004.
Rojas, E., Cuadrado-Roura J.R., Güell, J.M.F., editors. 2007. “Governing the Metropolis - Principles and Cases”. Inter-Amer-ican Development Bank, Washington, DC
Sansom, G. 2009. “Commonwealth of Australia”, in Steytler, N., Kinkaid, J., editors, Local Government and Metropolitan Regions in Federal Systems, McGill & Queens’s University Press, Montreal & Kingston, Canada. p 8-36
Sanz, I.A.. N.d. “Spanish Decentralization and the current autonomous state: a budgetary view”. Available at: http://www.asip.org.ar/en/content/spanish-decentralization-and-current-autonomous-state-budgetary-view
Searle, B. 2002. Federal fiscal relations in Australia-2001. International centre for economic research.
Seoul Metropolitan Government. 2006. “City Government”. Available at: http://english.seoul.go.kr/gover/main/gover_main.htm
Shah, Anwar. Qibthiyyah, Riatu. Dita, Astrid. 2012. General Purpose Central-Provincial-Local Transfer (DAU) in Indonesia. From Gap Filling to Ensuring Fair Access to Essential Public Services for All. Jakarta: World Bank, Poverty Reduction and Economic Management Unit.
Siddiqui K. 2004. Megacity Governance in South Asia – A Comparative Study. The University Press Limited, Dhaka.0
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 129
Simatupang, R.R. 2009. “Evaluation of Decentralization Outcomes in Indonesia: Analysis of Health and Education Sec-tors”. (PhD Dissertation Georgia State University Dec 2009)
Sjahrir and Katos. 2011. “Does local governments’ responsiveness increase with decentralization and democratization? Evidence from sub-national budget allocation in Indonesia”. University of Freiburg, Freiburg. (May 2011)
Slack, E. 2007. “Managing the Coordination of Service Delivery in Metropolitan Cities – The Role of Metropolitan Gover-nance”. Policy Research Working Paper. World Bank, Washington, DC.
SMERU Research Institute. 2008. The Specific Allocation Fund (DAK): Mechanisms and Uses.
Smith, R. 2012. “Combined Authorities: Stronger together?” Centre for Cities. July 2012.
Smoke, P. 2013. “Metropolitan Cities in the National Fiscal and Institutional Structure” in Bahl, Linn and Wetzel, editors. Financing Metropolitan Governments in Developing Countries. Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cambridge, MA.
Stren, R. 2007. “Urban governance in developing countries: Experiences and challenges”, in Hambleton, R., Gross J., editors, Governing Cities in a Global Era – Urban Innovation, Competition, and Democratic Reform, Palgrave Macmillan, New York. p 57-70
Suzuki, H, Cervero, R. and Iuchi, K. 2013. “Transforming Cities within Transit: Transit and Land-Use Integration for Sus-tainable Urban Development”. Urban Development Series. The World Bank, Washington, DC.
The Brookings Institute. 2014. “The Plummeting Labor Market Fortunes of Teens and Young Adults”. Metropolitan Policy Program. March 2014.
The Rand Corporation. 2008. “Transportation, Space, and Technology”. Moving Los Angeles: Short-term Policy Options for Improving Transportation.
The World Bank. 2008. “City Regions: Emerging Lessons from England”. Directions in Urban Development. The World Bank, Washington, DC.
The World Bank. 2015. “Economy Profile 2015: Malaysia.” Doing Business 2015: Going Beyond Efficiency. The World Bank, Washington, DC.
The World Bank. Unpublished. “Draft Concept Note for a Competitive Cities Knowledge Base”. December 2013.
Transportation Research Board of the National Academies. 2004. “Transit-Oriented Development in the United States: Experiences, Challenges, and Prospects”. TCRP Report 102.
Turan, N. 2011. “Towards an Ecological Urbanism for Istanbul”, in Sorensen, A., Okata, J., editors, Megacities–Urban Form, Governance and Sustainability. Springer, Germany. p 245-287.
United Cities Local Government (UCLG) and the World Bank. 2009. “Decentralization and Local Democracy in the World: First Global Report from United Cities Local Government”. The World Bank, Washington, DC.
United Cities Local Government (UCLG) and the World Bank. 2011. “Local Government Finance: The Challenges of the 21st Century”. Second Global Report from United Cities Local Government. The World Bank, Washington, DC.
130 Annexes
United Cities Local Government (UCLG). 2008. “UCLG Country Profiles: Indonesia”. Available at: http://www.cities-local-governments.org/gold/Upload/country_profile/Indonesia.pdf (retrieved October 2014).
United Cities Local Government (UCLG). 2008. “UCLG Country Profiles: Malaysia”. Available at: http://www.cities-local-governments.org/gold/Upload/country_profile/Malaysia.pdf (retrieved October 2014).
Webster, D., Cai, J., and Maneepong, C. 2006. “Metropolitan Governance in China: Priorities for Action in the Context of Chinese Urban Dynamics and International Experience.” Available at: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2006/09/7690452/metropolitan-governance-china-priorities-action-context-chinese-urban-dynamics-internation-al-experience
Western Economic Diversification Canada .2006. “The Livable City”. (Vancouver Working Group Discussion Paper). Gov-ernment of Canada, Ottawa.
Wilcox, Z., Nohrova, N. and Williams. 2014. “Breaking Boundaries: empowering city growth through cross-border collab-oration”. Centre for Cities. March 2014.
Williamson, J.G. 1965. Regional inequality and the process of national development: a description of the patterns. Eco-nomic development and cultural change, 1-84.
World Bank, n.d. World Bank Database. Available at: http://data.worldbank.org/
World Bank. 1991. “Mexico: Decentralization and Urban Management Urban Sector Study”. World Bank, Washington, DC. p. 38
World Bank. 2010. “World Development Report 2009 Reshaping Economic Geography”. World Bank, Washington, DC.
World Bank. 2012. Indonesia Subnational Public Expenditure Review. Optimizing Subnational Performance for Better Services and Faster Growth.
Yang, J. 2009. “Spatial Planning in Asia – Planning and Developing Megacities and Megaregions”, in Ross, C.L., editor, Megaregions: Planning for Global Competitiveness. Island Press, Washington, DC. p. 35-52
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 131
4. SOCIAL EXCLUSION (ANNEXES FOR CHAPTER 5)
4.1 Field Work Implementation Details
4.1.1 Calendar of events for qualitative field work
Table 4-1: Calendar of events for quantitative field work
No Dates Time PlaceType of
Discussion Attendance RemarksActivities Completed
1 18 Sept (Thurs) 2.30pm – 4.30pmMeeting Helene & the local WB Team
Project Preparation
5Briefing on the project dynamics
2 19 Sept (Fri) 2.00pm – 6.00pm MySkills Foundation, KL FGD 1 29The real disadvantaged target group. All Indians
3 20 Sept(Sat) 1.30pm – 5.30pm Sri Pantai Flats, KL FGD 2 11All Malays under a NH activity centre
4 21 Sept(Sun) 6.00pm – 8.00pm Telok Indah,Prai, Penang FGD 3 23 An urban poor NH. All Indians
5 22 Sept (Mon) 9.30am-11.30am Penang RTD 1 16++Good representation from Agencies & CSOs
6 22 Sept (Mon) 2.30pm-5.30pm Pusat Latihan Yakin Kejayaan FGD 4 29All urban poor youths, Mixed ethnic group
7 22 Sept(Mon) 9.00pm-11.00pm Sungai Pinang, Penang FGD 5 15 An urban poor NH. All Malays
8 25 Sept (Thurs) 8.00pm-11.00pm Sri Sarawak flats, KL FGD 6 8 Urban Poor Malays
9 27 Sept 2014 2.00pm-6.00pm Jireh Centre FGD 7 17Centre for Indigenous People Group, Tuaran, Near KK
10 28 Sept (Sun) 11.00am-1.00pm Seri Maju Flats, KK FGD 8 11Malays & Indigenous People Group
11 28 Sept (Sun) 3.00pm-6.00pm Tanjung Aru FGD 9 5People living on water, Naturalised Malays (ABIM)
12 29 Sept (Mon) Morning KBS Office, Kota Kinabalu RTD 2 10++ Agency Representatives
13 29 Sept (Sun) 2.00pm-5.00pm Grace & Mercy Centre KK FGD 10 12Malays & Indigenous People Group, near KK (Penampang)
14 2 Oct (Thurs) 2.30pm-5.30pm Jab. Belia dan Sukan, KL RTD 3 10++ Critical Agency Representatives
132 Annexes
No Dates Time PlaceType of
Discussion Attendance RemarksActivities Completed
15 10 Oct (Fri) Night Arriving at JB Preparation
16 11 Oct (Sat) 3.00pm-6.00pm FGD organised by JEWEL FGD 11 16 Multi-ethnic group
17 11 Oct (Sat) 9.00pm-10.00pm PPR Seri Kempas FGD 12 10 Malays from the neighbourhood
18 12 Oct (Sun) 3.00pm-6.00pm FGD organised by MIBA FGD 13 14 Indians
19 12 Oct (Sun) 9.00pm-12.00pmPPR Flats Larkin organised by KRT
FGD 14 17 Malays
20 13 Oct (Mon) 9.30am-12.30pm RTD in Johor RTD 4 10++ Agency Representatives
21 13 Oct (Mon) 2.30pm-5.00pmFGD organised by Calvary Centre
FGD 15 21Mixed Group of Indians & Chinese
23 17 Oct (Fri) Night Arriving at Kuantan Preparation
24 18 Oct (Sat) 2.30pm-5.30pmFGD at Tmn Alor Akar organised by JPNIN
FGD 16 22Low cost housing area, RP Alor Akar, Kuantan
25 18 Oct (Sat) 8.30pm-10.00pmFGD among the OAs in the city by an NGO
FGD 17 6 OA young people
26 19 Oct (Sun) 11.00am-1.30pm FGD organised by a CSO FGD 18 6 Street Kids, Malays
27 19 Oct (Sun) 9.00pm-11.00pmFGD organised at Semambu by JPNIN
FGD 19 4#Indians. This FGD is treated as Key informant interview. None are high risk youths
28 20 Oct (Mon) 9.30am-12.30pm RTD, Kuantan RTD 5 10++ Agency Representatives
29 28 Oct (Tues) 2.30pm-5.00pm FGD with KL Street people FGD 20 4KL Street community. Many came but only 4 of the target ge group
30 30 Oct (Thurs) Will be confirmed Leaving for Kuching Preparation
31 31 Oct (Fri) 2.30pm-5.00pm RTD, Kuching RTD 6 10++ Agency Representatives
32 1 Nov (Sat) 11.00am-1.00pmFGD in Kuching at Kota sentosa, Pasar Batu 7, near Public Bank
FGD NA#Organised by Mr Nicholas, NGO. Key Informant Interview
Table 4-1: Continued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 133
No Dates Time PlaceType of
Discussion Attendance RemarksActivities Completed
33 1 Nov (Sat) After 3.30pmFGD at 1AZAM STC, UNACO Supermarket
FGD 21 281 AZAM Dayak participants organised by Datu Ose.
34 2 Nov (Mon) 11.00am-1.00pmFGD at RT Taman Sri Makmur, Kuching
FGD 22 64 Organised by JPNIN
35 Meeting with EPU 2.30pmPutrajaya RTD on Data clarifications
RTD 7 on Data
15++Project Stakeholders & EPU Officials
4.1.2 Summary of participants in focus group discussions
Table 4-2: City by city gender participation
No Cities
Gender
TotalMale Female
1 Kuala Lumpur 39 13 52
2 Penang 52 15 67
3 Kota Kinabalu 30 15 45
4 Johor 44 34 78
5 Kuantan 31 3 34
6 Kuching 44 48 92
GRAND TOTAL 240 128 368
Figure 4-1: City by city participants in focus group discussions
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
18%
12%
21%
9%
14%
25%
Penang Kota Kinabalu
Johor Kuantan Kuala Lumpur
Kuching
Table 4-1: Continued
134 Annexes
Table 4-3: City by city ethnicity breakdown of participants
Cities Malays Chinese Indians Indigenous Others Total
Kuala Lumpur 20 0 29 1 2 52
Penang 22 0 45 0 0 67
Kota Kinabalu 4 1 0 28 12 45
Johor 35 12 31 0 0 78
Kuantan 27 0 0 7 0 34
Kuching 35 4 0 53 0 92
GRAND TOTAL 143 17 105 101 2 368
Percentage 38.9% 4.6% 28.5% 27.5% 0.5% 100%
Table 4-4: Educational attainment among focus group participants
Cities None < UPSR < PMR < SPM STPM TOTAL
Kuala Lumpur 1 17 11 22 1 52
Penang 2 9 14 41 1 67
Kota Kinabalu 0 1 21 23 0 45
Johor 5 15 36 22 0 78
Kuantan 1 2 9 22 0 34
Kuching 1 9 45 37 0 92
GRAND TOTAL 10 53 136 167 2 368
Percentage 2.7% 14.4% 37.0% 45.4% 0.5% 100%
Figure 4-2: Proportion of focus group discussants working
4.1.3 Focus group discussion questionnaire
148. The study team was guided by a page long simple questionnaire, which helped them gather the basic information. Guidance was also developed to help navigate the focus group discussions. Activity based discussions were used as an ice-breaker and helped put young people at ease. As the participants worked in small groups of about five people, they answered key questions, which they then presented using the papers and colors given to them. During these presentations the research team also asked questions and clarifications. The sessions were informal as well as lively and lasted for about two hours. There was good participation among the young people. In a number of groups multiple languages were used.
Working164 (45%)
Not working204 (55%)
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 135
Table 4-5: Structured questionnaire for the study on social inclusion
STRUCTURED QUESTIONNAIRE FOR THE STUDY ON SOCIAL INCLUSION CODE NO.
Where your answer is “yes” tick (✓) and where your answer is “no” mark it with (X)
A1. Pet Name
A2. Gender ❑ Male ❑ Female
A3. Age A4. Date of birth
A5. House address
A7. Type of house ❑ 1. Long house ❑ 2. Low cost flats ❑ 3. Low cost house ❑ 4. Others
A8. If others, explain A9. No. family members
A10. Contact HP A11. E-mail address
A12. Region❑ 1. Islam ❑ 2. Buddhism ❑ 3. Hinduism ❑ 4. Christianity ❑ 5. Others write in column _________________________________________________________________________
A13. Education
❑ 1. UPSR ❑ 2. PMR ❑ 2. BPM ❑ 4. None
A14. Educational institutions
❑ Primary school❑ Lower secondary school❑ Higher secondary❑ Others ____________________________________________________________________________________________❑ Skills training
A17. Participation in youth clubs and activitiesactivities
A18. If yes, give details and if No, why?❑ Yes _________________________________________________________________________________________________❑ No _________________________________________________________________________________________________
A19. Any involvement of you in ❑ Drugs❑ Crime❑ Prison❑ Court❑ No involvement
A20. Any family member has been in
❑ Drug centre❑ Arrested for questioning❑ In police lock up❑ In prison
A21. Any close friend has been in ❑ Drug centre❑ Arrested for questioning❑ In police lock up❑ In prison
A22. Any friend found it difficult to study?
❑ Yes❑ No
A23. Any friend found it difficult to get a job?
❑ Yes❑ No
Name and signature of the Enumerator Contact No. Date/Time
136 Annexes
4.1.4 Guidelines for focus group discussions
149. Target group: At risk youth (between 15-30 years old) in six urban centers:
a. Youth who have been detained at juvenile or correction centers or prisons
b. Living in high rise flat or low cost public housing or squatters
c. Dropped out of school or educational underachievers within the school system
d. At high risk groups to drugs, alcohol, abuse & gangs
e. Homeless youth and living on the streets
f. Youth who are drug addicts and those in drug rehabilitation centers
g. Youth on motor cycle racing gangs
h. Youth out of prison, juvenile centers or detention or rehabilitation centers
i. Youth in informal groups or gangs in the low income neighborhoods
150. Overall objective of the work on social exclusion as part of the broader study on competitive cities: To better understand the nature and mechanisms of the challenges faced by the socially excluded (focusing on at risk youth) in urban areas in Malaysia, as it relates to Competitive Cities.
151. Overall objective of the Focus Group Discussions: By listening to the voices of at risk youth, identify the key issues they face and the factors contributing to their social exclusion and vulnerability, as it relates to Competitive Cities.
152. Areas of inquiry: The following areas of inquiry related to social exclusion should be explored through the FGDs:
» Economic aspects: such as limited access to labor markets, financial resources and basic services (including Government programs). Are they able to access: Jobs, education, social services, financial services, training, and government services? Why/why not? What are the main challenges in accessing them?
» Political aspects: such as limited opportunities to participate in decision-making, make their voices heard. What are the obstacles they face in making their voices heard?
» Socio-cultural aspects: such as the isolation of specific groups through education, language and ethnic practices.
» Spatial aspect: How does your housing impact your situation (positively or negatively) location, mobility (access to jobs, education not in your neighborhood), physical housing, neighborhood set up/accessibility, social dynamics (eg. gangs, crime, peer pressure), opportunities to engage in criminal, anti-social activities, and other public safety concerns
» General Perceptions about inclusion/exclusion: Do they perceive themselves as included or excluded from society/culture/government systems; Do they feel the government is addressing your needs? How do you feel about your future prospects in life?
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 137
4.1.5 General Structure of the Focus Group Discussion
A. Start with an introduction:
a. Of the team
b. Of the objective of the FGDs: including explaining why we want to hear their voices
c. Of the agenda – stress that all the information provided is confidential
B. Exercise and group work
a. Explain the exercise
b. Break into small groups and assist the small groups as needed to re-explain the exercise
c. Report back from the small groups
C. Open discussion based on the exercise and group work
a. Facilitation of open discussion
b. Key questions to be systematically captured in all FGDs during the open discussion:
i) Why are they in the center (for focus groups with participants from centers/ programs / support groups etc.); why did they decide to join the center? Alternatively for FGD with participants not belonging to a center/ support group) Why are they not participating in a center / program / support group?
ii) What would they be doing if they were not in the center / support group?
iii) What more can the Government / city authorities do to help them feel more included in society?
D. Filling out the questionnaire
a. Ensure the questionnaire is available in the language of the group
b. Help the participants fill out the form as needed
c. Check each form to make sure it is accurately filled-out
E. Wrap-up and thank you
a. In the write-up of the FGDs, ensure that the composition, context and location specifics of each FGD location are clearly explained.
b. Prior to starting the FGDs, each facilitator is properly briefed on the focus and general objectives.
c. It is important to encourage both boys and girls to speak up, to ensure that their perspectives are captured.
138 Annexes
4.1.6 List of agencies in round table discussions
Table 4-6: Agencies in round table discussions
Agency PenangKota
KinabaluKuala
Lumpur Johor Kuantan Kuching Total
KBS 1 3 2 1 3 2 12
JKM 1 1 1 1 1 0 5
PDRM 2 1 0 1 0 2 6
Jab. Penjara 0 1 0 1 0 0 2
AADK 1 0 3 1 1 2 8
Sek. Tunas Bakti 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
JPNIN 1 1 1 2 1 0 6
Pendidikan 0 0 1 1 1 1 4
CSO 8 3 1 0 0 0 12
World Bank 1 1 1 1 1 1 6
Research Team 4 4 2 4 4 4 22
Total 20 15 12 13 12 12 84
4.1.7 Agenda: Agency Meeting: EPU November 3rd, 2014
Malaysia: Achieving a system of competitive cities: Focus Group Discussion on Social Inclusion
Venue: Level 6, B6 Economic Planning Unit
A. Introduction - Puan Azizah bt. Hamzah, Director, K-Economy
B. Overview of World Bank Study on Competitive Cities - Justina Chen, World Bank
C. Overview of Social Inclusion Component: Scope of Work and Methodology - Dr Denison Jayasooria, KITA-UKM
D. Presentation of Youth Data and Policies by Agencies: -
a. Department of Social Welfare
b. Ministry of Women, Family and Community Development
c. Prison Department
d. Police
e. State Education Departments
E. Closing Remarks - Dr. Ramli Nordin, K-Economy
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 139
4.1.
8 Li
st o
f Civ
il So
ciet
y O
rgan
izat
ions
in M
alay
sia
wor
king
wit
h yo
uth
at ri
sk
Tabl
e 4
-7: C
SOs
in M
alay
sia
wor
king
wit
h yo
uth
at ri
sk
Org
anis
atio
n
Type
of a
ssis
tanc
e /
soci
al p
rote
ctio
n
Loca
tion
Targ
et G
roup
Sum
mar
y of
Pro
gram
sCa
sh
tran
sfer
sTr
ansf
ers
in k
ind
Subs
idy
Educ
atio
n /
Trai
ning
Econ
omic
/
Soci
al a
cces
s to
ser
vice
s
Soci
al
supp
ort a
nd
care
Mal
aysi
a In
dian
Yo
uth
Coun
cil
✓
✓✓
Sela
ngor
, Ku
ala
Lum
pur
N.S
embi
lan,
M
alac
ca, P
enan
g,
Pera
k, P
ahan
g,
Keda
h
Indi
an y
outh
Spor
ts a
ctiv
ities
incl
udin
g co
mm
unity
sp
orts
; Sch
ool f
or m
usic
and
art
s;
Coun
selli
ng; Y
outh
dev
elop
men
t and
le
ader
ship
wor
ksho
ps, C
omm
unity
Ca
re C
ircl
es (3
C); S
kills
pro
gram
in
Indi
a an
d M
alay
sia
Yaya
san
Aman
✓
Nat
ionw
ide
Yout
h an
d yo
ung
adul
ts
Yout
h re
late
d w
ork
incl
udes
pro
vidi
ng
lead
ersh
ip tr
aini
ng p
rogr
ams
for y
outh
an
d yo
ung
adul
ts in
rura
l are
as.
Sri M
urug
an
Cent
re
✓
KL
, Sel
ango
r, Pe
nang
, Joh
orIn
dian
you
thFr
ee c
lass
es to
pre
pare
Indi
an s
tude
nts
for n
atio
nal e
xam
s
SUKA
Soc
iety
✓✓
Sela
ngor
Child
ren
at ri
sk
i.e. r
efug
ees,
m
argi
nalis
ed,
traffi
cked
vic
tims,
de
tain
ees,
you
ng
offen
ders
Regu
lar r
elap
se p
reve
ntio
n pr
ogra
mm
e fo
r you
ng o
ffend
ers
in ju
veni
le
pris
on fa
cilit
ies;
Tra
inin
g offi
cers
w
orki
ng a
mon
g tr
affick
ed v
ictim
s,
youn
g off
ende
rs a
nd d
etai
nees
; Le
ader
ship
and
per
sona
l dev
elop
men
t pr
ogra
mm
es; F
ollo
w-u
p pr
ogra
ms
to
care
for v
ulne
rabl
e re
fuge
e ch
ildre
n
Glob
al S
tree
t M
issi
on
✓KL
, Sel
ango
r, Ke
dah
Mar
gina
lised
gr
oups
i.e.
dr
ug a
ddic
ts,
pros
titut
es,
delin
quen
ts,
alco
holic
s,
dest
itute
Sets
up
vari
ous
hom
es/ c
entr
es ra
ngin
g fr
om d
rug
reha
bilit
atio
n ce
ntre
s an
d or
phan
ages
to h
omes
for s
kills
de
velo
pmen
t.
140 Annexes
Org
anis
atio
n
Type
of a
ssis
tanc
e /
soci
al p
rote
ctio
n
Loca
tion
Targ
et G
roup
Sum
mar
y of
Pro
gram
sCa
sh
tran
sfer
sTr
ansf
ers
in k
ind
Subs
idy
Educ
atio
n /
Trai
ning
Econ
omic
/
Soci
al a
cces
s to
ser
vice
s
Soci
al
supp
ort a
nd
care
Angk
atan
Bel
ia
Isla
m M
alay
sia
(The
Mus
lim
Yout
h M
ovem
ent
of M
alay
sia)
(A
BIM
)
✓
✓
Nat
ionw
ide
Mus
lim y
outh
Wom
en’s
pro
tect
ion
cent
re; L
eade
rshi
p an
d m
otiv
atio
nal p
rogr
ams;
Isla
mic
ed
ucat
ion
Maj
lis B
elia
M
alay
sia
(Mal
aysi
a Yo
uth
Coun
cil)
Nat
ionw
ide
All y
outh
-rel
ated
or
gani
satio
ns in
M
alay
sia
Um
brel
la b
ody
for a
ll yo
uth-
rela
ted
orga
nisa
tions
in M
alay
sia
All W
omen
’s
Actio
n So
ciet
y (A
WAM
)
✓
✓KL
,Sel
ango
rW
omen
Trai
ning
s on
rape
aw
aren
ess,
ant
i-se
xual
har
assm
ent p
olic
y, g
ende
r se
nsiti
satio
n, w
omen
’s le
ader
ship
and
po
litic
al p
artic
ipat
ion
whi
ch ta
rget
te
enag
ers
and
scho
ol-g
oing
chi
ldre
n am
ong
othe
rs; C
ouns
ellin
g an
d su
ppor
t se
rvic
es fo
r vic
tims
of d
omes
tic
viol
ence
Shel
ter H
ome
for
Child
ren
✓
KL
Yout
h ag
ed 1
3-18
fr
om d
ifficu
lt ba
ckgr
ound
s;
Refu
gee
child
ren
Prov
ides
hom
es fo
r boy
s an
d gi
rls a
ged
13-1
8 of
ten
stre
et c
hild
ren
or w
ho
com
e fr
om b
ackg
roun
ds o
f abu
se a
nd
negl
ect;
Prov
ides
car
e an
d ed
ucat
ion
to
refu
gee
child
ren
aged
bel
ow 1
8
Trin
ity H
ome
Sela
ngor
✓
Sela
ngor
Child
ren
aged
5-1
7;
mai
nly
Indi
an
Hom
e fo
r chi
ldre
n fr
om s
ingl
e m
othe
r/
impo
veri
shed
/ ne
edy
fam
ilies
Yaya
san
Keba
jikan
Sur
ia
✓Sa
bah
Child
ren
aged
8-1
7H
ome
for c
hild
ren
who
are
orp
hane
d/
poor
Mon
tfor
t You
th
Trai
ning
Cen
tre
✓
✓✓
Saba
h
Two-
year
resi
dent
ial p
rogr
amm
e w
hich
te
ache
s liv
ing
skill
s an
d is
tailo
red
to
inst
ill d
isci
plin
e, g
uida
nce,
spi
ritu
al
form
atio
n, s
oft s
kills
and
lead
ersh
ip
skill
. Pro
gram
me
incl
udes
bot
h Ge
nera
l St
udie
s an
d Te
chni
cal S
kills
(Mot
or
Vehi
cle
skill
s, F
urni
ture
Mak
ing,
Re
figer
atio
n an
d Ai
r-co
nditi
onin
g m
echa
nics
)
Agat
hiar
Cha
rity
O
rgan
isat
ion
✓
✓
Sela
ngor
Child
ren
of s
choo
l-go
ing
age
Food
and
tran
spor
t for
sch
ool c
hild
ren
arou
nd th
e De
ngki
l are
a; F
inan
cial
as
sist
ance
for p
oor c
hild
ren
Tabl
e 4
-7: C
onti
nued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 141
Org
anis
atio
n
Type
of a
ssis
tanc
e /
soci
al p
rote
ctio
n
Loca
tion
Targ
et G
roup
Sum
mar
y of
Pro
gram
sCa
sh
tran
sfer
sTr
ansf
ers
in k
ind
Subs
idy
Educ
atio
n /
Trai
ning
Econ
omic
/
Soci
al a
cces
s to
ser
vice
s
Soci
al
supp
ort a
nd
care
Yaya
san
Sunb
eam
s H
ome
✓
Sela
ngor
, Mal
acca
Child
ren
and
yout
h ag
ed 1
-22
(Chi
nese
, In
dian
and
Ora
ng
Asli)
Hom
e fo
r und
erpr
ivile
ged
child
ren;
Co
mm
unity
Lea
rnin
g Ce
ntre
Pusa
t Keb
ajik
an
Kalv
ary
✓
Joho
r
Teen
age
girls
an
d bo
ys fr
om
chal
leng
ing
back
grou
nds
Hom
e an
d re
habi
litat
ion
cent
re
Pusa
t Keb
ajik
an
Good
She
pher
d
✓✓
✓Se
lang
or, S
abah
Teen
age
girls
(S
elan
gor)
, You
th
(Sab
ah)
Teen
age
Cent
re o
ffers
the
follo
win
g pr
ogra
ms
for t
eena
ge g
irls
: ful
l re
side
ntia
l pro
gram
; Wee
kend
re
side
ntia
l pro
gram
; Pre
vent
ive
outr
each
pro
gram
s.
Yout
h Pr
ep C
entr
e off
ers
the
follo
win
g to
you
th in
Sab
ah: A
‘poi
nt o
f re
fere
nce’
for t
hose
leav
ing
hom
e fo
r th
e fir
st ti
me,
cou
nsel
ling
serv
ices
;hel
p fo
r job
see
kers
thro
ugh
part
ners
hip
with
em
ploy
ers;
on-
goin
g sk
ills
deve
lopm
ent
Raka
n M
uda
Nat
ionw
ide
Seco
ndar
y sc
hool
st
uden
ts
Free
tuiti
on c
lass
es in
Eng
lish,
M
athe
mat
ics,
Dra
win
g an
d Pa
intin
g,
Thea
tre,
Mus
ic
Yaya
san
Chow
Ki
t
✓
✓KL
Adol
esce
nts
and
yout
h w
ho a
re
vuln
erab
le a
nd
at ri
sk in
KL
city
ce
ntre
Runs
a te
en a
nd y
outh
cen
tre
whi
ch
offer
s te
ens
and
yo
uth
with
alte
rnat
ives
to ri
sk b
ehav
ior
that
may
exp
ose
them
to g
angs
, vi
olen
ce, c
rim
e, s
ubst
ance
abu
se a
nd
the
risk
of H
IV in
fect
ion
- foc
uses
on
skill
s de
velo
pmen
t
StAR
T
Se
lang
orU
nder
priv
ilege
d ch
ildre
nM
ulti-
disc
iplin
ary
arts
aca
dem
y fo
r un
derp
rivi
lege
d ch
ildre
n
142 Annexes
Org
anis
atio
n
Type
of a
ssis
tanc
e /
soci
al p
rote
ctio
n
Loca
tion
Targ
et G
roup
Sum
mar
y of
Pro
gram
sCa
sh
tran
sfer
sTr
ansf
ers
in k
ind
Subs
idy
Educ
atio
n /
Trai
ning
Econ
omic
/
Soci
al a
cces
s to
ser
vice
s
Soci
al
supp
ort a
nd
care
Rum
ah K
asih
✓
✓
Sela
ngor
Girls
age
d 7-
18
Shel
ter h
ome
for g
irls
from
poo
r or
sing
le p
aren
t fam
ilies
; Tra
inin
g ce
ntre
fo
r gir
ls th
at p
rovi
des
brid
al m
ake-
up
and
sew
ing
clas
ses
Gene
rasi
Ge
mila
ng
✓Se
lang
orTe
enag
ers
and
youn
g ad
ults
Coun
selli
ng a
nd C
are;
Cyb
er
wel
lnes
s cl
asse
s; S
ex a
nd S
ensi
bilit
y Pr
ogra
mm
e;
Oza
nam
Ser
vice
Ce
ntre
✓✓
Sela
ngor
, KL
Yout
hCo
unse
lling
ser
vice
s; T
rain
ing;
Car
eer
guid
ance
; Pro
vide
tert
iary
edu
catio
nal
oppo
rtun
ity o
r tra
de/s
kills
pro
gram
me
Tabl
e 4
-7: C
onti
nued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 143
4.2
Li
st o
f Fed
eral
Gov
ernm
ent P
rogr
ams
for Y
outh
Tabl
e 4
-8: F
eder
al g
over
nmen
t pro
gram
s fo
r you
th
Min
istr
y /
Agen
cy /
O
rgan
isat
ion
Type
of a
ssis
tanc
e /
soci
al p
rote
ctio
n
Targ
et G
roup
Polic
y Su
mm
ary
Cash
tr
ansf
ers
Tran
sfer
s in
ki
ndSu
bsid
yEd
ucat
ion
/ Tr
aini
ng
Econ
omic
/
Soci
al a
cces
s to
ser
vice
s
Soci
al
supp
ort
and
care
Min
istr
y of
Wom
en,
Fam
ily a
nd
Com
mun
ity
Deve
lopm
ent
✓
Yout
h in
nee
d RM
200/
mon
th a
ppre
ntic
eshi
p al
low
ance
✓
Child
ren:
pro
gram
mes
fo
r 1. o
rpha
ns o
r chi
ldre
n w
ithou
t pro
per p
aren
ting;
2.
chi
ldre
n in
fost
er c
are
1. R
M10
0-RM
450/
mon
th, 2
. RM
250-
RM
500/
mon
th
✓
Und
erpr
ivile
ged
grou
psRM
2700
one
off
gran
t to
laun
ch a
new
bus
ines
s
✓
Child
ren
in n
eed
of
assi
stan
ce
Inst
itutio
nal p
rote
ctio
n: C
hild
ren
Hom
es, R
umah
Tu
nas
Har
apan
, Spe
cial
Pro
tect
ion
Cent
re, E
hsan
sh
elte
rs (S
tree
t Chi
ldre
n)…
✓
Child
ren
in n
eed
of
assi
stan
ceIn
stitu
tiona
l reh
abili
tatio
n: S
choo
l Tun
as B
akti,
Re
man
d, P
roba
tion
Hos
tels
✓
Child
ren
in n
eed
of
assi
stan
ce
Exte
rnal
pro
tect
ion:
Fos
ter p
aren
ts, C
hild
Pr
otec
tion
Team
, Kid
s Ac
tivity
Cen
tre,
Witn
ess
Serv
ice
Prog
ram
me
✓
Child
ren
in n
eed
of
assi
stan
ceEx
tern
al re
habi
litat
ion
prog
ram
: Chi
ld W
elfa
re
Com
mitt
ee, U
nres
trai
ned
child
ren
✓
Child
ren
in n
eed
of
assi
stan
ce
Exte
rnal
dev
elop
men
t ser
vice
s: S
port
s To
urna
men
t for
Chi
ldre
n In
stitu
tions
; Ban
ds
Tour
nam
ent f
or C
hild
ren
Inst
itutio
ns; C
hild
hood
Ed
ucat
ion;
Hum
an C
apita
l Dev
elop
men
t; Vo
catio
nal S
kills
Tra
inin
g; C
omm
unity
chi
ldca
re
cent
re
144 Annexes
Min
istr
y /
Agen
cy /
O
rgan
isat
ion
Type
of a
ssis
tanc
e /
soci
al p
rote
ctio
n
Targ
et G
roup
Polic
y Su
mm
ary
Cash
tr
ansf
ers
Tran
sfer
s in
ki
ndSu
bsid
yEd
ucat
ion
/ Tr
aini
ng
Econ
omic
/
Soci
al a
cces
s to
ser
vice
s
Soci
al
supp
ort
and
care
Min
istr
y of
Edu
catio
n
✓
All s
tude
nts
in g
ov. s
choo
ls
1. G
rant
Per
Cap
ita (p
re-s
choo
l, pr
imar
y an
d se
cond
ary
scho
ol)
2.Sc
hool
Co-
curr
icul
um
3. S
choo
ling
Assi
stan
ce (p
rim
ary
and
seco
ndar
y sc
hool
) - R
M10
0 on
e-off
✓
Poor
stu
dent
s in
resi
dent
ial
scho
ols
From
RM
700/
year
in F
orm
1 to
RM
450/
year
in
Form
5
✓
Seco
ndar
y sc
hool
stu
dent
s w
ho e
xcel
in s
port
sRM
70/m
onth
✓
Poor
stu
dent
s: T
rust
Fun
d (K
WAP
M)
RM30
0/ye
ar (s
econ
dary
sch
ool)
+ m
onth
ly
assi
stan
ce
RM25
-RM
60 (d
epen
ding
on
prim
ary/
seco
ndar
y sc
hool
and
pov
erty
leve
l)
✓
Stud
ents
in ru
ral/
rem
ote
area
s an
d th
ose
livin
g on
th
e is
land
sRM
60 o
ne-o
ff sa
fety
jack
et a
ssis
tanc
e
✓
All s
tude
nts
Text
boo
ks a
nd tr
ansp
ort a
ssis
tanc
e
✓
MO
E pr
e-sc
hool
and
bo
ardi
ng s
choo
l stu
dent
sFo
od a
ssis
tanc
e
✓
Stud
ents
that
use
uni
form
sU
nifo
rm a
ssis
tanc
e
✓
Poor
stu
dent
s w
ith lo
w
acad
emic
ach
ieve
men
tTu
ition
Aid
Sch
eme
(TAS
) - p
rovi
sion
of e
xtra
cl
asse
s fr
ee o
f cha
rge
✓
All s
tude
nts
in g
over
nmen
t an
d go
vern
men
t ass
iste
d sc
hool
s
Text
book
Loa
n Sc
hem
e (T
BLS)
- pr
ovis
ion
of
text
book
s fr
ee o
f cha
rge
✓
Ora
ng A
sli a
nd P
enan
Pa
rent
sAd
ult l
itera
cy c
lass
✓
Child
ren
from
low
inco
me
hous
ehol
ds
1Asr
ama
host
els
whe
re c
hild
ren
enjo
y a
mor
e co
nduc
ive
lear
ning
env
iron
men
t and
lear
ning
su
ppor
t
Tabl
e 4
-8: C
onti
nued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 145
Min
istr
y /
Agen
cy /
O
rgan
isat
ion
Type
of a
ssis
tanc
e /
soci
al p
rote
ctio
n
Targ
et G
roup
Polic
y Su
mm
ary
Cash
tr
ansf
ers
Tran
sfer
s in
ki
ndSu
bsid
yEd
ucat
ion
/ Tr
aini
ng
Econ
omic
/
Soci
al a
cces
s to
ser
vice
s
Soci
al
supp
ort
and
care
Min
istr
y of
Hig
her
Educ
atio
n
✓
Stud
ents
with
dis
abili
ties
in u
nive
rsiti
es, c
omm
unity
co
llege
s an
d po
lyte
chni
cs
Uni
vers
ities
: tui
tion
fees
(max
RM
5k/y
ear)
and
po
cket
mon
ey (R
M30
0/m
onth
); Co
mm
unity
co
llege
s an
d po
lyte
chni
cs: R
M3,
360-
RM3,
660/
sem
este
r
✓
Com
mun
ity c
olle
ge
stud
ents
in n
eed
RM25
0/m
onth
Edu
catio
n Lo
an F
und
✓
Bum
iput
era
stud
ents
in
finan
cial
nee
d or
who
ha
ve s
uffer
ed a
n ac
cide
nt/
disa
ster
(MAR
A Fo
unda
tion
Pr
ogra
mm
es)
Diffe
rent
leve
ls o
f ass
ista
nce
thro
ugh
diffe
rent
sc
hem
es (S
PC, S
PT, S
PIN
, SDE
P, S
AA, S
BP
sche
mes
)
✓
Stud
ents
in fi
nanc
ial n
eed:
Ed
ucat
ion
Fund
ing
by
Nat
iona
l Hig
her E
duca
tion
Fund
Cor
pora
tion
Fina
ncia
l ass
ista
nce
depe
ndin
g on
the
in
stitu
tion
✓
Form
6 a
nd c
olle
ge
stud
ents
RM25
0 on
e-off
BB1
M b
ook
vouc
hers
Min
istr
y of
Fin
ance
✓
1. L
ow in
com
e ho
useh
olds
an
d 2.
sin
gle
pare
nts
BR1M
1. R
M50
0 an
d 2.
RM
250,
bot
h on
e-off
tr
ansf
ers
Prim
e M
inis
ter’s
De
part
men
t✓
M
aste
r and
PhD
stu
dent
sVa
riou
s sp
onso
rshi
p pr
ogra
mm
es
Tabu
ng E
kono
mi
Kum
pula
n U
saha
N
iaga
(TEK
UN
)
✓
Sm
all b
umip
uter
a en
trep
rene
urs
Up
to R
M50
k fin
anci
ng fo
r wor
king
cap
ital
(TEK
UN
Fin
anci
ng S
chem
e)
Perb
adan
an
Usa
haw
an N
asio
nal
Berh
ad (P
UN
B)
✓
Yo
ung
bum
iput
era
entr
epre
neur
s
Acce
ss to
wor
king
cap
ital (
PRO
SPER
Usa
haw
an
Mud
a sc
hem
e) -
Up
to R
M50
k fin
anci
ng
(indi
vidu
al) o
r RM
100k
(par
tner
ship
)
Min
istr
y of
Hum
an
Reso
urce
s
✓
Une
mpl
oyed
gra
duat
es1M
alay
sia
Trai
ning
Sch
eme
Prog
ram
me
(SL1
M) -
so
ft s
kills
trai
ning
for g
radu
ates
✓
Scho
ol d
rop-
outs
SAY1
M p
rogr
amm
e fo
r stu
dent
dro
pout
s, w
hich
off
ers
cour
ses
to s
ecur
e em
ploy
men
t, in
clud
ing
inte
rnsh
ips
in G
over
nmen
t Lin
ked
Com
pani
es
and
the
priv
ate
sect
or.
146 Annexes
Min
istr
y /
Agen
cy /
O
rgan
isat
ion
Type
of a
ssis
tanc
e /
soci
al p
rote
ctio
n
Targ
et G
roup
Polic
y Su
mm
ary
Cash
tr
ansf
ers
Tran
sfer
s in
ki
ndSu
bsid
yEd
ucat
ion
/ Tr
aini
ng
Econ
omic
/
Soci
al a
cces
s to
ser
vice
s
Soci
al
supp
ort
and
care
Skill
s De
velo
pmen
t Fu
nd C
orpo
ratio
n (P
TPK)
✓
Trai
nees
und
erta
king
M
alay
sia
Skill
s Ce
rtifi
cate
Loan
s fo
r tra
inee
s un
dert
akin
g th
e M
alay
sia
Skill
Ce
rtifi
cate
Lev
el O
ne to
Fiv
e.
Mal
aysi
a Co
mm
unic
atio
ns
and
Mul
timed
ia
Com
mis
sion
✓
Low
-inco
me
yout
h be
twee
n ag
es 2
1-30
RM20
0 sm
artp
hone
reba
te
Vari
ous:
Min
istr
y of
Yo
uth
and
Spor
ts;
Min
istr
y of
Hig
her
Educ
atio
n an
d M
inis
try
of H
uman
Re
sour
ces
✓✓
Indi
an y
outh
age
d 15
to 4
5 w
ho a
re s
choo
l dro
p-ou
ts o
r se
ek to
lear
n ne
w s
kills
Yout
h Sk
ills
Trai
ning
Pro
gram
me
prov
ided
by
vari
ous
inst
itutio
ns w
ith fu
lly s
ubsi
dise
d fe
es a
nd
cost
s
Tabl
e 4
-8: C
onti
nued
Malaysia: Achieving a System of Competitive Cities 147
4.3 Case Study: England supports affordable housing through land planning and policy
153. Land planning and policies are the primary tools used in England to facilitate the construction of affordable housing. England has a number of policies that are designed to contribute towards the provision of affordable housing and social inclusion. The most prominent are the Planning and Policy Statement 3 (PPS3) (DCLG 2011) which deals with Housing, and Section 106 (S106) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990,(GoUK c.1990) which provides guidance to local authorities regarding development of affordable housing. The combination of these enables local authorities – the bodies which review, negotiate and approve development proposals – to ensure affordable housing is built in compliance with national guidance on mixed housing.
154. Given the PPS3s objective to provide “sustainable, inclusive, mixed communities in all areas, both urban and rural” (DCLG 2011), the main focus of S106 planning achievements has been to facilitate tenure mix in new developments. By 2008 S106 had been successful in securing more than half of all affordable housing built in England (Monk 2010). Case studies show that successful S106 developments hold a range of tenure types and are home to a social mix of tenants. One example - Imperial Warf development in London – designed a development that would include 1,065 residential units, 515 of which were affordable housing. Subsequent revisions to the plan that reduced the number of affordable units were rejected by the planning authority, and the 515 affordable unites were eventually built and finalized before any of the market rate units were allowed to be rented or sold. Among these 515 homes, the units were designed to have: 275 units for social rent, an additional 50 units for social rent to the ‘frail elderly’ (i.e. specially adapted units), 75 shared-ownership units, 40 student accommodation units, 50 key worker47 units for rent, and 25 key worker unites for sale. Adhering to the principles of mixed use, this same building included 8,000 square meters of office floor space, 6,600 square meters of retail and restaurant floor space, 2,000 square meters for non-residential institution (the medical facility), a 175 bedroom hotel, 3,000 square meters for a health and fitness club. In addition, planning permission was contingent of the development of a park, and a riverside walk, transport access and a parking strategy (Monk 2010).
155. Evidence, such as the above, suggests that S106 has been successful in facilitating the creation of mixed communities as well as meeting affordable housing needs (Monk 2010). One study asked “how far does the provision of ‘on-site’ affordable housing contribute to the government’s objectives of creating mixed communities?” and concluded that it did a reasonable job in achieving this. It found that many of the affordable housing sites were in more expensive areas that had not traditionally been associated with affordable housing. It was highlighted that the most successful buildings in terms of harmonious communities and market sales were those in which one couldn’t tell which units were social housing and which were market housing. This is important as perceptions of social housing are rather negative and respondents fear the potential knock-on effects that low-income residents may bring, such as antisocial behavior, that could affect the market rates of their property. The study was unable to conclude whether mixed tenure has had a positive effect on the social outcomes of social housing beneficiaries.48
156. It is often argued that simply mixing tenure and ethnicity will not necessarily lead to most positive social outcomes for the disadvantaged. One researcher argues that creating mixed neighborhoods treats a symptom of inequality, not its causes. One study of mixed tenure in urban Scotland found no consistent pattern in health outcomes according to tenure type, but in areas with a large number of social housing tenants, some specific health issues had worse outcomes than in areas with a lower concentration of social housing (Lawder et al 2014). On employment, another, longitudinal study (Feng et al 2013), examined the neighborhood effects of ethnic inequality on economic activity. The study found that, overall, ethnic minorities were, more likely to become unemployed and less likely to become employed. It also concluded that living in a deprived neighborhood was
47 Key workers are defined as public sector employee who is considered to provide an essential service. The term is used in reference to essential workers who may find it difficult to buy property in the area where they work.
48 Both cases from Monk 2010
148 Annexes
associated (positively) with transitions to unemployment and (negatively) with transitions to employment, especially among men. Ethnic diversity was negatively associated with job loss among employed women, but also for homemaking women and their chances of finding employment.
4.4 Annex 4 References
Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG). 2011. “Policy Planning Statement 3 (PPS3): Housing”. DCLG, London.
Feng, X., Flowerdew, R. and Feng, Z. 2013. “Does neighbourhood influence ethnic inequalities in economic activity? Find-ings from the ONS Longitudinal Study”. Journal of Economic Geography pp. 1–26.
Government of the United Kingdom (GoUK), c.1990. “Town and Country Planning Act. Website” Available at: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/8/section/106. (Accessed 6 June, 2014).
Lawder, R., Walsh, D., Kearns, A. and Livingston, M. 2014. “Healthy Mixing? Investigating the Associations between Neigh-bourhood Housing Tenure Mix and Health Outcomes for Urban Residents”. Urban Studies. 51(2) 264–283, February 2014.
Monk, S. 2010. “England: Affordable Housing Through the Planning System: The Role of Section 106”. In Inclusionary Housing in International Perspective: Affordable Housing, Social Inclusion and Land Value Recapture. N. Calavita and A. Mal-lach, editors. Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cambridge, MA.
Malaysia’s cities are dynamic centers of innovation and have much potential to play an
increasingly important role as drivers of economic growth for the country. Yet, cities can grow
in different ways that will affect their competitiveness and livability, requiring policies that
create opportunities, foster productivity, minimize environmental degradation and ensure
social equity. This study focuses on understanding three key aspects of city competitiveness:
economic growth, urban governance, and social inclusion, through extensive analysis and
field work in six urban centers of Malaysia. Based on the analysis, the study lays out a set of
policy recommendations that aim to address existing challenges and create opportunities for
achieving a system of competitive cities.