Keadilan Spasial Puskesmas dan Pemenuhan Hak Warga di Kawasan Metropolitan Tangerang Raya
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.37950/joc.v5i3.857Abstract
Ketimpangan akses pelayanan publik di kawasan metropolitan bukan sekadar persoalan jumlah fasilitas, melainkan persoalan keadilan spasial dan pemenuhan kewarganegaraan secara substantif. Penelitian ini menganalisis ketimpangan akses pelayanan publik di kawasan metropolitan Tangerang Raya yang terdiri atas Kabupaten Tangerang, Kota Tangerang, dan Kota Tangerang Selatan. Dengan mengadaptasi logika spatial equity Chen et al. (2021), penelitian menggabungkan pencocokan distribusi penduduk-fasilitas, rasio tingkat pelayanan, Koefisien Gini, Kurva Lorenz, dan location quotient. Karena data berkoordinat yang terharmonisasi untuk seluruh sektor pelayanan belum tersedia secara serentak, Puskesmas digunakan sebagai layanan sentinel yang paling dapat dibandingkan antardaerah, sedangkan sektor pelayanan publik lain digunakan dalam interpretasi kelembagaan dan hak warga. Data resmi tahun 2024 dihimpun dari BPS dan pemerintah daerah. Tiga wilayah menampung sekitar 6,82 juta penduduk dengan 119 Puskesmas. Kabupaten Tangerang menampung lebih dari separuh penduduk metropolitan, tetapi hanya memiliki 44 Puskesmas dengan location quotient 0,73; Kota Tangerang dan Kota Tangerang Selatan masing-masing memiliki location quotient 1,22 dan 1,36. Pada skala kecamatan, Koefisien Gini distribusi Puskesmas terhadap penduduk sebesar 0,133 di Kota Tangerang dan 0,091 di Kota Tangerang Selatan. Namun, location quotient mengungkap defisit layanan lokal yang tidak terlihat dari nilai Gini agregat, terutama di Larangan dan sejumlah kecamatan berpenduduk besar. Temuan menegaskan bahwa status kewarganegaraan yang setara tidak otomatis menghasilkan akses efektif yang setara. Kebijakan pelayanan publik metropolitan perlu diarahkan pada koordinasi lintas batas, investasi berbasis kebutuhan, dan pemantauan keadilan spasial secara rutin.
References
Aiginger, K., & Pfaffermayr, M. (2004). The single market and geographic concentration in Europe. Review of International Economics, 12(1), 1–11.
Brenner, N. (2002). Decoding the newest ‘metropolitan regionalism’ in the USA: A critical overview. Cities, 19(1), 3–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0264-2751(01)00042-7
Chen Hou, Y., Q., & Wu, S. (2016). Assessment of accessibility to urban parks in Shaoxing city from the perspective of opportunity equity. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 36(03), 375–383.
Chen Ji, X. F., Ji, X., F., & Zhang, H. D. (2015). The measurement method and spatial differentiation of urban transport equity. Economic Geography, 35(04).
Chen Lin, N., Wu, Y., Ding, L., Pang, J., Y., & Lv, T. (2021). Spatial equity in the layout of urban public sports facilities in Hangzhou. PLOS ONE, 16(9). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0256174
Chen, Y. (2010). Optimizing the distribution of community sports service facilities based on GIS. Economic Geography, 30(08), 1254–1258.
Cutumisu, N., & Spence, J. C. (2012). Sport fields as potential catalysts for physical activity in the neighbourhood. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 9(1), 294–314. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph9010294
Delbosc, A., & Currie, G. (2011). Using Lorenz curves to assess public transport equity. Journal of Transport Geography, 19(6), 1252–1259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2011.02.008
Fainstein, S. S. (2010). The Just City. Cornell University Press.
Feiock Steinacker, A., R. C., & Park, H. J. (2009). Institutional collective action and economic development joint ventures. Public Administration Review, 69(2), 256–270. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2008.01972.x
Feiock, R. C. (2013). The institutional collective action framework. Policy Studies Journal, 41(3), 397–425. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12023
Giles-Corti, B., & Donovan, R. J. (2002). Socioeconomic status differences in recreational physical activity levels and real and perceived access to a supportive physical environment. Preventive Medicine, 35(6), 601–611. https://doi.org/10.1006/pmed.2002.1115
Gini, C. W. (1912). Variability and mutability: Contribution to the study of statistical distributions and relations. Studi Economico-Giuridici della R. Università de Cagliari.
Gordon-Larsen Nelson, M. C., Page, P., P., & Popkin, B. M. (2006). Inequality in the built environment underlies key health disparities in physical activity and obesity. Pediatrics, 117(2), 417–424. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2005-0058
Guagliardo, M. F. (2004). Spatial accessibility of primary care: Concepts, methods and challenges. International Journal of Health Geographics, 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/1476-072X-3-3
Halonen Stenholm, S., Kivimäki, M., Pentti, J., Subramanian, S. V., Kawachi, I., et al., J. I. (2015). Is change in availability of sports facilities associated with change in physical activity? Preventive Medicine, 73, 10–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2015.01.012
Hansen, W. G. (1959). How accessibility shapes land use. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 25(2), 73–76.
Harvey, D. (1973). Social Justice and the City. Edward Arnold.
Higgs Langford, M., G., & Norman, P. (2015). Accessibility to sport facilities in Wales: A GIS-based analysis of socio-economic variations in provision. Geoforum, 62, 105–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2015.04.010
Hong, S. J., & Zhang, X. C. (2016). Rent gap, gentrification and urban redevelopment: The reproduction of urban space driven by capital and right. Urban Studies, 23(03), 101–110.
Undang-Undang Nomor 25 Tahun 2009 tentang Pelayanan Publik, (2009).
Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2014 tentang Administrasi Pemerintahan, (2014).
Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945, (1945).
Koohsari Mavoa, S., Villanueva, K., Sugiyama, T., Badland, H., Kaczynski, A. T., et al., M. J. (2015). Public open space, physical activity, urban design and public health: Concepts, methods and research agenda. Health & Place, 33, 75–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2015.02.009
Lefèvre, C. (1998). Metropolitan government and governance in western countries: A critical review. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 22(1), 9–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.00120
Liu, L. (2013). Theoretical model and empirical analysis on equalization of China’s sports public service. China Sport Science, 33(01), 10–16.
Liu, Y.-D. (2009). Sport and social inclusion: Evidence from the performance of public leisure facilities. Social Indicators Research, 90(2), 325–337.
Lorenz, M. O. (1905). Methods of measuring the concentration of wealth. Publications of the American Statistical Association, 9(70), 209–219.
Lu, G. H. (2004). Research on layout of life sport facility function in Shanghai. China Sport Science, 06, 10–14. https://doi.org/10.16469/j.css.2004.06.003
Luo, W., & Wang, F. (2003). Measures of spatial accessibility to health care in a GIS environment: Synthesis and a case study in the Chicago region. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 30(6), 865–884. https://doi.org/10.1068/b29120
Ma Li, Y. H., Q. W., & Deng, J. (2016). Spatial layout and functional evaluation of medical facilities: Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. Planners, 32(05), 104–110.
Ma Ma, Z. Q., Dai, J., Z. H., & Zhang, L. (2004). Research on central place theory and spatial distribution of urban sport facilities. Journal of Beijing Sport University, 04, 445–447. https://doi.org/10.19582/j.cnki.11-3785/g8.2004.04.004
Marshall, T. H. (1950). Citizenship and Social Class and Other Essays. Cambridge University Press.
Omer, I. (2006). Evaluating accessibility using house-level data: A spatial equity perspective. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 30(3), 254–274.
Ostrom, E. (2010). Beyond markets and states: Polycentric governance of complex economic systems. American Economic Review, 100(3), 641–672. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.100.3.641
Pacione, M. (1989). Access to urban services: The case of secondary schools in Glasgow. Scottish Geographical Magazine, 105(1), 12–18.
Pereira Schwanen, T., R. H. M., & Banister, D. (2017). Distributive justice and equity in transportation. Transport Reviews, 37(2), 170–191. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2016.1257660
Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Harvard University Press.
Seifried, C., & Clopton, A. W. (2013). An alternative view of public subsidy and sport facilities through social anchor theory. City, Culture and Society, 4(1), 49–55.
Selatan., B. P. S. K. T. (2025). Kota Tangerang Selatan Dalam Angka 2025. BPS Kota Tangerang Selatan.
Selatan., D. K. K. T. (2025). Profil Kesehatan Kota Tangerang Selatan Tahun 2024. Pemerintah Kota Tangerang Selatan.
Sen, A. (1999). Development as Freedom. Alfred A. Knopf.
Shi Zhou, S. H., Z. Q., & Chen, Y. (2020). Jobs-housing relationship in different industries and its impact on traffic demand on road networks: A case study in Guangzhou. City Planning Review, 44(02), 87–94.
Skoric, M. M., Zhu, Q., Goh, D., & Pang, N. (2016). Social media and citizen engagement: A meta-analytic review. New Media & Society, 18(9), 1817–1839. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444815616221
Smoyer-Tomic Hewko, J. N., K. E., & Hodgson, M. J. (2004). Spatial accessibility and equity of playgrounds in Edmonton, Canada. The Canadian Geographer, 48(3), 287–302.
Soja, E. W. (2010). Seeking Spatial Justice. University of Minnesota Press.
Sun, T. H. (2013). Study on public sports facility layout planning. Applied Mechanics and Materials, 440, 397–401. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.440.397
Talen, E. (1998). Visualizing fairness: Equity maps for planners. Journal of the American Planning Association, 64(1), 22–38.
Tang, J. L. (2012). Theoretical research on practical experience of equalization of public sports services abroad. Journal of Xi’an Physical Education University, 29(06), 641–646.
Tang, Z. L., & Gu, S. (2015). An evaluation of social performance in the distribution of urban parks in the central city of Shanghai: From spatial equity to social equity. Urban Planning Forum, 02, 48–56.
Tang, Z. L., & Jiang, K. X. (2016). Social equity performance evaluation of rail transit network: A case study in Shanghai central district. Urban Transport of China, 14(02), 75–82.
Tangerang., B. P. S. K. (2025a). Kabupaten Tangerang Dalam Angka 2025. BPS Kabupaten Tangerang.
Tangerang., B. P. S. K. (2025b). Kota Tangerang Dalam Angka 2025. BPS Kota Tangerang.
Tangerang., D. K. K. (2024). Tim Akreditasi Dinkes Kabupaten Tangerang lakukan monitoring dan evaluasi kestabilan layanan Puskesmas. Pemerintah Kabupaten Tangerang.
Tangerang., P. K. (2025a). Dokumen perencanaan daerah 2025–2029: kondisi demografis dan pelayanan dasar Kabupaten Tangerang. Pemerintah Kabupaten Tangerang.
Tangerang., P. K. (2025b). Laporan Penyelenggaraan/Keterangan Pertanggungjawaban Pemerintahan Daerah Tahun 2024. Pemerintah Kota Tangerang.
Tian, Z. M. (1995). The problem of optimization of the spatial organization of athletic service facilities. Human Geography, 02, 67–72.
Wei, W., & Wang, J. (2015). Performance evaluation system construction of Chinese public sports service and empirical research. China Sport Science, 35(07), 35–47.
Welch, T. F. (2013). Equity in transport: The distribution of transit access and connectivity among affordable housing units. Transport Policy, 30, 283–293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2013.09.020
Yang Guo, A. D., Li, X. M., J., & Huang, T. (2018). Study of the impact of a high-speed railway opening on China’s accessibility pattern and spatial equality. Sustainability, 10(8). https://doi.org/10.3390/su10082943
Zhang Hua, W. T., J. Z., & Hua, C. (2012). Research on the spatial equity in the distribution of public facilities based on location quotient. Architectural Technology, 30(02), 38–40.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Author and Journal of Citizenship
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with Journal of Citizenship (JOC) agree to the following Open Access terms:
- Authors transfer the copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- 4.0 International License. that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Journal of Citizenship (JOC) is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
