Toward a social construction of water resources management: The case of Kalimantan

Abstract

Water resource management in the era of disruptive innovation and industrial revolution 4.0 is becoming more complex and challenging. The aim of this article is to criticize the current development of water resources which often neglects the social construction of its artefacts. We argue that such disentanglement has become the main driver of more severe social problems, economic inequality, sustainability issues, among others. This research uses Anthony Giddens structuration theory which looks at the relationship between agents and structures with an epistemological approach to clarify the underlying reasons. We combined the use of participant-observation as well as a desk study to examine the relation of social aspects in the context of water management by following the qualitative ethnographic approach that allows us to “be there”. Data collection was carried out through observation and secondary documentation. The integration between poiesis and praxis is an important factor towards a more balanced water management practice. Departing from structuration theory and social construction perspective, we found that there is a separation in the management of water resources. We then propose a model for developing a more balanced water resource management by taking into account social construction in its surrounding environment. Therefore, it is important for academics, policymakers, and governments to manage water resources in a more multidimensional manner.

Keywords:

• Integrated water management
• water management framework
• socially integrated
• poiesis
• decoupling

PUBLIC INTEREST STATEMENT

Managing scarce resources such as water is and has never been easy, especially in the context of less developed countries during the digital era. We realize that in managing public resources such as water, we tend to focus on the technicalities and neglect the social construction of such issues. Not surprisingly, water management can be quite problematic aggravated by social interactions and economic development in the surrounding area. This article attempts to provide a more systematic approach to foresee those aforementioned issues. A consolidated framework like this can become an effective forms of aligning social aspects with technical peculiarities to confront the problem of water management. Consequently, we should not separate water from the construction of our daily life due to, not only its scarcity, but also its multidimensionality.

1. Introduction

Individuals are both products and creators of social institutions. Through their creative activities, humans construct society and various other aspects of social reality (Berger & Luckmann, 1966). The social reality that it creates then confronts the individual as an external and objective reality. The individual then internalizes this reality so that it becomes part of his/her consciousness. In water resource management, we tend to put more emphasis on the technical aspects of water management, while the social construction of its surrounding communities rarely get attention (Gleick, 2000).

In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle distinguishes the notion of praxis (πρᾶξις) and poiesis (ποίησις) (Pakaluk, 2005). Poiesis, or making, is an act for the sake of an outcome outside the act itself, for example, building something to get a house. In poiesis what matters is the result and not the work that produces it. Whereas in praxis or action, the impact or output is secondary. Praxis is not the same as practical practice or preoccupations that require skills, dexterity, and all kinds of activities. In Greek philosophy and specifically Aristotle, the word praxis has an exact and distinctive meaning.

This article attempts to shed more light on the entanglement between praxis and poiesis in the context of water resource management. For example, does the water resource still give meaning to the surrounding community? Although development and modernity have taken over, do water resources such as rivers still have other functions? In every life, humans must be able to adjust to the natural environment and social and cultural. How do humans shape and develop life in certain ecological environments such as water? This is the central focus of this paper. We believe that by addressing such complexities, water resource management can become much more cost-efficient and effective in meeting its sustainable target.

The article is structured as follows. In Section 2, we describe our theoretical foundation being used in this study. Section 3 elaborates our methodological choices. Concommittantly, the next section portrays the story of our cases. Departing from our cases, Section 4 provides a discussion and analysis to come up with our proposed framework. Finally, Section 5 concludes our study and provides several limitations as well as suggestions for future research.

2. Theoretical background

Departing from Aristotelian philosophy, there is an objective social world that shapes individuals, in the sense that humans are the product of their society (Macionis et al., 2015). This objective reality is reflected by others and internalized through the process of socialization by individuals in childhood, and when they are adults they continue to internalize the new situations they encounter in their social world (Macionis et al., 2015). Water resources, indeed, can never be separated from human life at any stage in their lives (Iman, 2019), making it a prime candidate to be investigated further in this article.

Anthony Giddens (1984), through structuration theory, is commonly seen as the first in producing a theory that connects structure and agency. According to him, what is meant by structure is the rules and resources used in the production and reproduction of the system. Meanwhile, agency is an individual and everything is impossible through individual intervention. The relationship between structure and agency is dialectical, influence each other and this goes on continuously without stopping (Giddens, 1984). Structure influences the agency in two senses: enabling and constraining. The occurrence of paradoxes in the understanding of this structure because Giddens sees the structure as an outcome as well as a medium of social practice (see Figure 1).

Figure 1. Structuration theory. Source: Adapted from Giddens (1984, p. 29)

The general form of social processes is social interaction, because social interaction is the main condition for the occurrence of social activities (Macionis et al., 2015). Social interactions are dynamic social relations that involve relationships between individuals, between human groups, and between individuals with human groups. Social interaction is not possible if it does not meet two conditions, namely: the existence of social contact and the existence of communication. This social interaction can be in the form of cooperation, competition, and disagreement or conflict.¹

In community life which is strongly influenced by the culture of the river, the river can play a variety of functions. First, the river functions as transportation route. Before the opening of the land route, the river was the only traffic lane. Economically, the physical environmental conditions of which there are many rivers have led to economic activity through rivers. Subiyakto (2005a) has made a historical description of the river cruise integration function of the economy of South Kalimantan in the past. River navigation as a way of transportation and transportation is very dependable on its inhabitants. Relationships between places or contact between residents can only take place through the way of navigating waterways, such as rivers, canals, lakes, coastal waters, and straits. These five forms of waterways are water elements as a whole part of the physical geographic conditions of South Kalimantan.

In accordance with their natural environment, people choose a variety of livelihoods according to their natural surroundings (Zhang, 2019). With the environmental conditions of irrigation, almost all community life activities are carried out in water, ranging from commodity transportation, to the daily mobility of the population (Nuralang, 2004). The smooth transportation has accelerated the process of distributing goods to the destination. Economically, the availability of the transportation network has smoothed the distribution of goods so that it can increase production and consumption for the community (Kansoh et al., 2020).

Efforts to facilitate transportation, distribution of goods, and contact between members of the community are not solely carried out through large river channels, but also through smaller rivers with their tributaries and canals. At least the Banjar people know 3 (three) types of canals, namely anjir, handil, and saka (Subiyakto, 2005b). Anjir(antasan) is a kind of primary channel that connects between two rivers, serves for the public interest, with a center of gravity as an irrigation channel and transportation route. Handil (tatah), a kind of stream that empties into rivers or streams, is made to channel water to agricultural land in the mainland. Handil is smaller than that of anjir, and belongs to a certain group. Meanwhile, Saka is a tertiary channel for channeling water, which is usually taken from handil. Saka is smaller than handil, and is a family or personal property.

Humaidy (2005) stated that the canals (anjir, handil, saka) were truly the original works of the Banjar people, which he called the Banjar people’s irrigation system. The wisdom of the ancestors of the Banjar community were very smart and preparing its environment for centuries ahead. They considered that the irrigation system was very unique in order to answer the challenge of a city with many tidal rivers. Canals have multiple functions as a means of agriculture, shipping lines, transportation of goods, and community needs for water, bathing, washing (see Al-Mefleh et al., 2019).

The aquatic environment is also a medium for socialization among its citizens (Tundisi, 2008). Such process of socialization is concerned with the process of learning culture in relation to its social system. In this process, an individual from childhood to old age learns patterns of action in interaction with all kinds of individuals around him/her who occupy a variety of social roles that may exist in everyday life. Besides socialization, there are actually other important concepts related to the cultural learning process by the community members concerned, namely internalization and enculturation (Macionis et al., 2015). Indeed, within this context, it is also important to analyze the impact of such technological system to promote growth and inclusion (see Junarsin et al., 2021; Shaikh & Sohu, 2020).

The functions of the system that surrounds the river in South Kalimantan should first explain Merton’s (1968) thoughts about functional analysis. Even though Merton considers that the national approach is not a comprehensive and integrated theory, it can be used as a strategy for analysis. In developing this idea, he emphasizes actions that are either probable or standard related to the survival of a social system in which they are rooted. Merton (1968) also distinguishes the seminal functions and the latent functions. The manifest functions are objective consequences that contribute to the adjustment to the system that is intended and known by participants in the system, whereas latent functions are those that are not intended and are unknown.

In what follows, we will describe our methods and approach, start with a structuration model that are based on empirical observation, highlight the current problems and challenges facing water management resources, and propose a more comprehensive framework that are applicable and useful in such circumstances.

3. Methods and approach

This research employs Anthony Giddens’s (1984) structuration theory that looks at the relationship or reciprocity between agents and structures. We use qualitative research with a descriptive case study approach (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). We utilize data and information that are intended to describe problems systematically, factually, and actually that occur at the study site. Descriptive research describes a situation or process that is studied in depth to help researchers in explaining the reasons behind phenomena. Data collected through interviews, observations, and secondary documentation (Denzin and Lincoln, 2011).

The author uses classical epistemological approach in this paper to clarify the underlying reasoning. By utilizing these concepts, the author illustrates contemporary views on more socially constructed water management. The roots of praxis and poiesis derive from Aristotle’ Nichomachean Ethics, distinguishing theory from practical activities as well as an end in itself. Praxis described as an act that has meaning in itself without requiring observable result. Poiesis, however, is making an artefact that is separate from the act and aiming at the product itself. We consider such a unification between poiesis and praxis to be an important factor towards a more balanced water management practices.

To gather data and information, we conducted an ethnographic case study of water management in Kalimantan. We combined the use of participant-observation as well as a desk study to examine the relation of social aspects in the context of water management. Therefore, we followed the qualitative ethnographic approach that allows us to “be there” and scrutinize the entanglement of social and technical aspects, poiesis and praxis, in a particular area of study (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). To investigate the dynamic of water resource management, our study relied on public data on government policies, newspapers and magazines, the aforementioned desk study, as well as other relevant publications on the subject to be analyzed further using content analysis (Denzin and Lincoln, 2011).

We chose Kalimantan (Borneo) as our main study area. Kalimantan is touted as one of the lungs of the world because of its forest area which reaches up to 40.8 million hectares (Bajarmasin Post, 2021). Unfortunately the rate of deforestation in Kalimantan is so fast. According to data released by the Ministry of Forestry, the deforestation rate in Kalimantan from 2000 to 2005 reached around 1.23 million hectares (Profauna.net, 2020). According to Greenpeace, only 25.5 million forests remained in Kalimantan in 2010. Apart from causing ecological problems, this deforestation also affects water resource availability on the island of Kalimantan. Not only that, the social and cultural aspects of this phenomenon are greatly affected. This is the reason why we chose Kalimantan as the area of study.

4. Tales from the fields

Kalimantan was chosen as the object of study because the government of the Republic of Indonesia has allocated at least 45% of Kalimantan as the world’s lung. This effort is part of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 26% by 2020. This has been stated in Presidential Regulation No. 3 of 2012 concerning Kalimantan Island Spatial Planning derived from Law No. 26 of 2007 concerning spatial planning. This sublime effort is not entirely free of problems. For example, the Governor of Central Kalimantan, Teras Narang, admitted that he had never been involved in the drafting of the presidential regulation, although in principle the local government approved the Heart of Borneo program plan (Lestari, 2012).

The involvement of local government is very important because it is related to the clarity of the status of conservation areas and economic aspects. For example, there are coal mining zones with high conflict potential. In addition, there are also some areas that have high diversity that are vulnerable to destruction such as forest fires, illegal logging and hunting of animals. So far, the budget for protecting conservation and protected areas is only around US$ 4 or less than 40,000 per hectare per year, whereas ideally it is US$ 50 per hectare per year (Lestari, 2012).

The following picture is a map of the city of Banjarmasin, South Kalimantan. The city of Banjarmasin, nicknamed the City of Thousand Rivers, has an area of 98.46 km² which is a delta or archipelago consisting of about 25 small islands (deltas) separated by rivers including Tatas Island, Kelayan Island, Rantau Keliling Island, Insan Island, and others (Rahim, 2018). The left side depicts the Barito river which is an estuary for other rivers that flow through the city of Banjarmasin. It is similar to Martapura, Alalak, Kuin, as well as other rivers. The upper right is a map of the river route that crosses the city of Banjarmasin and the lower right is a map of the canal (see Figure 2).

Figure 2. Map of Banjarmasin, South Kalimantan. Source: Wijanarka (2008)

The Banjar people have been familiar with the canal system consisting of anjir, handil, and saka (Pudjianto, 2018). The system has become the knowledge of the Banjar people in general as the main mover of the wheel of life and development of the city of Banjarmasin. This is quite different from Pontianak, West Kalimantan, which is known to have many trenches and is called a “city of a thousand trenches” which has become an inseparable part of people’s lives.

The functions carried out by the river such as the transportation function, the economic facilities function, as well as the interaction and socialization function are the forms of the fundamental structure of the river itself. Obviously, the objective consequences of the river were consciously known, so the function of the river was part of the manifested structure. Whereas the latent function of the river with all of the above activities as a public space for cultural learning, thus enabling humans to shape and develop social life in a particular ecological environment.

Not only for agriculture and plantation, rivers in Kalimantan also affect social construction in the society. Residential housing is built along the river channel, both on the banks and over the river. Houses built on the banks of the river face the river, but those built on the river are facing the river. The construction of houses on the river has caused the river channel to narrow. As a result of the times and population growth, people began to build homes far from the riverbank. But the community still determines the direction based on the position of the river.

Population growth, housing development in land areas, and road construction on both banks of the river have indeed reduced river transportation activities. However, it turns out that the river is still not abandoned at all by the people who live on the banks of the river. First, the river has always played an important role as a transportation route, because the rivers that flow all flow into the Barito River as the largest river in South Kalimantan. Although the frequency of river transportation has begun to decrease, there are still some residents who use the river channel. Every morning, traditional river transportation can be observed, such as jukung and klotok going back and forth on the river (see Figure 3). Jukung is a term used by all Barito lowland communities and is used for all types of boats/ship bodies.

Figure 3. Jukung or Klotok. Source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/22216875@N05/

There are 2 (two) basic types of jukung, namely jukung prepared from trees that are halved, and jukung processed from one whole tree trunk (Rochgiyanti, 2011). The jukung and klotok transport merchandise from the earth’s produce, in the form of vegetables, fruits, fish, etc. The merchandise is brought to the floating market, taken to small markets on the banks of the river, or sold to houses along the river. In the afternoon we can see an amazing view, when the vendors go home hand in hand using a jukung. They wear wide hats from purun, and the jukung without motorbikes are pulled by a jukung.

Every morning we can also see klotok used to transport students who are going to their schools. In this context the use of klotok as well as school transportation such as lift/school bus with the cost of riding klotok cheaper than riding a motorcycle taxi. Actually there are city taxis (angkot), but there are taxis that do not pass through the school. The taxi only reached the floating market taxi base, and to go to school he had to take a motorcycle taxi or walk but the distance was quite far. Therefore these students prefer to take klotok, down at the trunk near the school, and the cost is cheaper. When they come home from school, they will use the services of their family again. The function of klotok as an effective and efficient transportation is what makes klotok as a traditional means of transportation in the modern era has not been replaced.

The absence of a bridge that connects one area to another makes people unable to move freely. The large budget that must be spent by the government to make a bridge to connect residential areas with one another is also certainly more difficult to realize. Because of this, the jukung connecting one residential area to another are a solution.² The river functions as a transportation route, to facilitate the mobility of goods and people. The distribution of goods from one place to another relates to the population’s economic activity. In the morning the jukung and klotok go back and forth on the river to transport merchandise, both in the form of agricultural produce, fishery products, food, and grocery items. The merchants peddle their wares along the river. They stopped at the trunks of houses or at public stalls.

The reason traders use the jukung and klotok instead of using modern transportation is because the two traditional means of transportation provide convenience for the traders. First, merchandise in the form of agricultural produce, fishery products, food, and grocery items can be traded easily because traders can transact with buyers in bars. Second, between klotok and jukung is an integrated system that provides many functions. Third, this transportation has not been replaced by more effective and efficient land transportation.

A lively atmosphere was found when the seller stopped and tethered the klotok or jukung in the public trunk. Not how long the seller has been covered by potential buyers. The seller remains in the jukung, while the buyers are on the trunk or the walkway. That is where trade transactions occur. The buyers, who are mostly mothers, buy goods for their daily needs, such as vegetables, fish and fruits. During the fruit season, a beautiful view will be seen, when the jukung or klotok travels over the river carrying red, green, and yellow rambutan or orange. If they buy food/cakes, the buyers will take the food using a long-stemmed device.

People prefer to shop vegetables and fish to the trunk, because they do not need to spend money, time and energy to go to the market. In addition, the prices of these goods are cheaper, because sellers usually take their merchandise directly from farmers, and can even come directly from the first hand (producers). Therefore merchandise, such as fish, vegetables, and fruit are still in fresh condition. The fish they buy can be immediately cleaned (weeded) in the trunk, so that when brought home it is clean. When in the trunk, he also while carrying the laundry. This means that while doing the washing job, he can while shopping for daily consumption.

Apart from traveling vendors, economic activities are also undertaken by residents who have homes on the river. Houses built on the river, many of which face two directions, namely the direction of the river and the direction of land. They have two bays, the front porch facing the land and the back porch facing the river. However, many houses were built facing the road, while the rear was used as a family kitchen and toilet. For houses that have two porches, many use the back porch as a kiosk. They open stalls that sell food, grocery items, as well as gasoline and kerosene. There is even a food stall that is deliberately built facing the river, in other words the river is used as an open view by the food stall. These stalls serve buyers who ride in jukung or klotok. In fact, many klotok or other motorized boats stop by the stalls to refuel. When the klotok fills up on gasoline, passengers can go up to the stall to drink tea, eat cake, or eat rice. Thus the river as a transportation route also has a positive effect on residents who live on the river, namely economic and social effects. The social effects are interactions between citizens and interactions between sellers and buyers.

The rivers in such region have long played an important role in contacting various interests. Evidence of this contact is the discovery of an ancient site on the banks of the river. Until now the river still plays an important role in the interaction between the people of the community, even though there have been developed residents’ settlements built far from the river banks. For example, even though the house on land is equipped with a bathroom with water facilities from the government, they still prefer to bathe in the river. The reason the people prefer to stay in the river is because they feel more satisfied, they can do it while they are swimming, and they can meet other neighbors. This means that while bathing in the river, they can interact with neighbors who are also bathing in the river. Many things they talk about, ranging from things that are light to things that are serious.

The activities of residents, who live on the river, on the banks of the river, or some distance from the river, have started since dawn. There are those who only bathe and wash, or start economic activities. In the morning, there were many people, both men, women, old, young, and children who bathed in the river. There is something to be discussed in the activity. Indeed, that morning there were plenty of opportunities for grass-roots, while waiting for the arrival of vegetable and fish seller jukung. When the sun is higher the activity on the banks of the river gradually becomes quiet.

In the afternoon the activity on the river bank begins again, that is when the residents bathe in the sun. In the afternoon many children who bathe while playing in the river. These children are generally adept at swimming and diving. While bathing, they are joking, typical cheerfulness of children. Sometimes children are seen playing in a row of arms, or racing across the river. In addition, anglers can also be found standing on the bridge, or sitting on the edge of the sun. While fishing, they talk about various things. After sunset it is often found by teenagers who gather at the bridge. During the holidays, the number of teenagers who get together increases. Aside from being a medium of interaction, river banks also function for socialization media, which is a process of learning culture by community members.

Unfortunately, the values of social construction are starting to disappear. For example, the Anjir Serapat Canal which was once the transportation artery connecting Banjarmasin (South Kalimantan) to Kuala Kapuas and Palangka Raya (Central Kalimantan). The Anjir Serapat Canal is now a quiet canal only occasionally by klotok and barge ships carrying timber from Central Kalimantan to South Kalimantan, or klotok which transports the sengon timber which is brought to the wood factory. Sometimes a small speed boat crosses even then it can be counted on the fingers passing in one month.

Anjir Serapat Canal, said to be made only about 3 meters wide and 28 kilometers long, was made in the era of W. Broers, the highest Dutch ruler in South Kalimantan in 1880–1890, by utilizing the traditional abilities of the Banjar people (see Figure 4). With a device called a sundak, a thin board made of ironwood, the Banjar people made canals. Long before the construction of Anjir Serapat Canal, in fact the Banjar people had made many canals for transportation and agricultural purposes on tidal land. The Banjar people are able to make waterways along tens of kilometers by hand. Rivers, canals, and boats are the breath of life of Borneo people since hundreds of years ago.

Figure 4. Anjir Serapat Canal. Source: Banjarmasin Post (2016)

However, the Anjir Serapat Canal gradually became wider because of the abrasion of the waves of transportation that passed through it. In 1994 the Anjir Serapat canal was carried out by the government so that the width of the canal was almost 50 meters with a length of about 16 km and the rest had not been cleared until now. In addition, the, Trans Kalimantan road that follows the Anjir Serapat Canal that connects Palangka Raya and Banjarmasin has also begun to be improved. In 1997, the Barito Bridge was inaugurated by President Soeharto so that land transportation began to stretch and gradually eroded river transportation that passed through the Anjir Serapat Canal.

Since the accompaniment has been carried out until now there has been no improvement at all both the siring and harbor ports made from ironwood. In fact, many of the ironwood ports were damaged and the woods were gone. This is what makes Anjir Serapat Canal condition even more disorganized. When the water receded, it would be seen the riverbed and passing wooden ships carrying wood and others were stuck in the middle of the river and could not continue because it had run aground.

5. Discussion and analysis

Policymakers and regulators face difficulties in their professional activities. They encounter external conditions and organizational circumstances that often decouple from its intended purposes (Macionis et al., 2015). Based on the aforementioned case, we develop a model that aim for the importance of evaluating and re-evaluating both agency and structure (Giddens, 1984), as well as the influencing factors and challenges embedded in water management activities (see Figure 5).

Figure 5. Proposed water management framework

The proposed framework argues for the importance of improvisation in water management structure, team incentive culture, cooperative culture, as well as related learning orientation. We relate this proces to Giddens (1984) structuration theory on the difference between structure and agency. We describe agency, in this mode, as facilities, norms, as well as interpretive scheme, supported by certain specialist in the related field. Borrowing from Berger and Luckmann (1966) social construction perspective, this means a focus on technical-practical performance of water management acitivities will not be adequately sufficient without considering the social structure embedded in its surrounding social environment.

In the context of water resource management in Kalimantan, we must pay attention to the interaction between agency and structure (Gleick, 2000). For example, in structure, improvization of water management practice becomes an important foundation for other aspects. Without improvization, team incentive culture will not be formed, as well as cooperative culture and learning orientation. as a result, policy making will never be effective and will not be able to solve the social problems that arise around the Anjir Serapat Canal.

Furthermore, the process within the agency itself also needs to be considered to ensure qualified water resource management. Every agency involved needs to build an alignment between facilities, norms, and interpretive schemes (Giddens, 1984). Facilities can be in the form of water resources installation along the Anjir Serapat Canal. Norms can be in the form of delivering proper and adequate water quality. Meanwhile, the interpretive scheme is an effort made to improve ways of agriculture in the area around the canal. All of that needs to be wrapped in good cooperation with support specialists—in this case is both the regional and national government.

Recalling back to our case, the river for people on the banks of the river in South Kalimantan still plays an important role in various aspects of life. The river does not merely function as a transportation route, but the river also plays a role in economic activity (Tundisi, 2008). In addition, there are still many people who use the river for bathing and washing. While carrying out these activities, community members can interact for various purposes. Aside from being a medium of interaction, river banks are also used as a means of socialization to learn the culture of the people. The river still occupies an important position in people’s lives, which has a variety of functions, ranging from transportation to social and economic functions of the community. The function of the river as such confirms the function of manifest, but no less important is the function of the river into a public space of cultural learning, river culture community with all the ideas of activities and artifacts generated from it (Gleick, 2000). This is the latent function of the river in human social processes on it.

In line with the thesis of Berger and Luckmann (1966), practical awareness is the key to understanding the process of how our various social actions and practices (outpouring) gradually become structures, and how they restrain or enable social actions or practices (internalization), which actually similar to the idea of Giddens (1984). The dialectical process between structure and individual occurs in three moments, namely objectivation, internalization, and externalization. Giddens (1984) calls this dialectical process a reciprocal relationship that occurs in social practices between structure and agency, or duality. A description of dialectics in shaping reality which involves the mode of objectivation, internalization, and externalization (Berger & Luckmann, 1966). Social reproduction takes place through the repetition of social practices that are rarely questioned by actors.

In Giddens (1984) reflection, change is always involved in the structuration process, however small the change is. The line between practical and discursive awareness is very thin, unlike the distance between discursive awareness and unconscious motivation that is so far away. He argued that as actors, we have the ability to reflexive monitoring of conduct. Changes occur when the capacity to take this distance extends so that “de-routine” takes place. De-routinizing involves a symptom that the schemata that have been the rules and resources of our social actions and practices are no longer sufficient to be used as a principle of meaning and organization of various social practices that are taking place or that are being fought for to become new social practices. What then happens is the obsolence or obsoleteness of the structure. Structural changes mean schematic changes to better suit social practices that are constantly developing.

We argue that water management practices are only a social reproduction and without change. It has been disrupted from the entanglement between poiesis and praxis, between structure and agent, between intended policy and expected outcome—as can be seen clearly from the case of Anjir Serapat Canal. This problem is common in infrastructure development and modernity that shapes modern society today (Macionis et al., 2015). Various aspects of life, including water management, have been decoupled from their noble purposes. As a result, the development of water resources is nothing more than artifacts. In the long run, this causes economic inequality, social problems, and brings environmental sustainability issues (Gleick, 2000).

6. Conclusion

We begin this article by trying to look back at the issues surrounding water resource management. We took the Anjir, Handil, and Saka case which had been embedded in the Banjarmasin community, South Kalimantan. Departing from Aristotelian philosophy, structuration theory, and social constructivist perspective, we find that there has been a decouple in water resource development and management. We believe that such civil structure artifacts should not be seen merely as stand-alone engineering artifacts. We must see it as an integrated whole with the environment and surrounding communities.

It is important for us to see water management practices more comprehensively. Individuals are both products and creators of social institutions and technological artifacts. Through their creative activities, humans construct technological tools and artifacts, as well as construct society and various other aspects of social reality. The social reality that it creates then confronts the individual as an external and objective reality. The individual then internalizes this reality in such a way that it becomes part of his consciousness and spreads it to the wider communal society. Water, as scarce resources, cannot be separated from the construction especially in this disruptive innovation era and industrial revolution 4.0. Therefore, it is important for academics, policymakers, and governments to manage water resources in a more multidimensional manner.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

The authors received no direct funding for this research.

Notes on contributors

Edy Sriyono

Edy Sriyono holds a master’s degree from Gadjah Mada University as well as a Ph.D. degree from Diponegoro University in civil engineering. He has 32 years of experience as a lecturer, researcher, and consultant in the field of water resources management. His current research interests are water resources management.

Dyah Permata Budi Asri graduated with a master’s degree at Gadjah Mada University and a doctorate in law at the Islamic University of Indonesia. More than 20 years of research and teaching experience focusing on business law, corporate law, and sociology of law.

Sardi holds a master’s degree from Bandung Institute of Technology in environmental engineering. He has 21 years of experience as a lecturer, researcher, and consultant in the field of water resources environment. His current research interests are water resources environment.

Notes

1. A contact is not only dependent on the action, but also the response to the action. A social contact can be positive or negative, it can lead to cooperation or opposition. In addition, a contact can be primary or secondary, that is a direct relationship or requires an intermediary. Communication is also important in social interactions, because one needs to provide an assessment of the behavior of others, what feelings that person wants to convey.

2. The stories above are examples of the function of the river as a transportation route that can still be seen in Banjarmasin.