Malaysian urban Indicators Network: A sustainable development initiative in Malaysia

Abstract

Sustainable development means the capacity to meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. In Malaysia, the effort to implement sustainable development was highlighted in the Eight Malaysian Plan in 2001 to 2005. In year 2004, a set of indicators that can measure the sustainability of development which is known as Malaysian Urban Indicators Network (Murni Net) System was formed. It is an attempt for the government to ensure fulfilling their national aspiration in realizing the concept of sustainable development in this country. This system provides 55 indicators in measuring the sustainability of urban areas which administered by Local Authority. Since the implementation, it is said to improve the sustainability of many cities based on scores achievement. Therefore, the objectives of this paper are to identify number of indicators use by selected local authorities in Malaysia and also to determine the scores achievement by the cities to be awarded as sustainable cities in Malaysia. Expert interviews were conducted to town planners in 7 Local Authorities. It shows that it was a non-optimal use of indicators by Local Authorities as only 10 main indicators are used out of 55 indicators. There is also no uniformity on the use of indicators but somehow the sustainable cities still can be awarded.

Full text

European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 25, Number 1(2011)
77
Malaysian Urban Indicators Network: A Sustainable
Development Initiative in Malaysia
Marlyana Azyyati Marzukhi
Faculty of Architecture, Planning and Surveying
Universiti Teknologi MARA, 40450 Shah Alam, Malaysia
E-mail: mlyana79@gmail.com
Tel: +6013-395 3379
Dasimah Omar
Faculty of Architecture, Planning and Surveying
Universiti Teknologi MARA, 40450 Shah Alam, Malaysia
E-mail: dasimaho@yahoo.com
Oliver Ling Hoon Leh
Faculty of Architecture, Planning and Surveying
Universiti Teknologi MARA, 40450 Shah Alam, Malaysia
E-mail: oli761@yahoo.com
Muhammad Sharil Hamir
Faculty of Architecture, Planning and Surveying
Universiti Teknologi MARA, 40450 Shah Alam, Malaysia
Maassoumeh Barghchi
Faculty of Architecture, Planning and Surveying
Universiti Teknologi MARA, 40450 Shah Alam, Malaysia
Abstract
Sustainable development means the capacity to meet the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. In Malaysia, the
effort to implement sustainable development was highlighted in the Eight Malaysian Plan
in 2001 to 2005. In year 2004, a set of indicators that can measure the sustainability of
development which is known as Malaysian Urban Indicators Network (Murni Net) System
was formed. It is an attempt for the government to ensure fulfilling their national aspiration
in realizing the concept of sustainable development in this country. This system provides
55 indicators in measuring the sustainability of urban areas which administered by Local
Authority. Since the implementation, it is said to improve the sustainability of many cities
based on scores achievement. Therefore, the objectives of this paper are to identify number
of indicators use by selected local authorities in Malaysia and also to determine the scores
achievement by the cities to be awarded as sustainable cities in Malaysia. Expert interviews
were conducted to town planners in 7 Local Authorities. It shows that it was a non-optimal
use of indicators by Local Authorities as only 10 main indicators are used out of 55
indicators. There is also no uniformity on the use of indicators but somehow the sustainable
cities still can be awarded.

European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 25, Number 1(2011)
Keywords: Sustainable Development, Indicators, Malaysian Urban Indicators Network,
Local Authority
1. Introduction
National Urbanization Policy (2006) outlines the importance of creating an urban area that has vision
with a community and prosperous life through sustainable urban development. Increasing the quality of
life refers to the quality of infrastructure and facilities which provided for city residents such as
housing, education, recreation and public facilities. Sustainable city is also important in controlling the
development of a town based on the quantity and quality of infrastructure and facilities are sufficient to
avoid other problems, such as lack of housing in urban areas that will cause squatter settlements.
Sustainable urban development process is under the responsibility of State Government and Local
Authorities that play a key role in creating a sustainable city. Sustainable urban development that
carried out by Local Authority is focus on enhancing the quality of the environment through the
collection of information, strategies, make decisions and implement strategies that are planned. The
strategies will also lead to the major goal; the development of a sustainable city by creating a city that
could serve as the main engine for national level.
Indicators are often mentioned in policy studies because they claim to make available
information about the linkages between different sectors and about emerging trends (OCED, 1996).
Indicators are important in the implementation of the concept of sustainability in the planning and city
development. Indicators used as a tool in monitoring and show the sustainability of city development
and should closely associated with the main objective of sustainable urban development. The indicators
must be able to show the level of sustainability of a city. Indicators have also been accepted as a
prerequisite in designing and making more sustainable future in local and global level (Department of
Town and Country Planning Peninsular Malaysia, 2005). The purpose of indicators is to provide a tool
for guidance in sustainability policies, including monitoring of measures and their results, and
communication to the public (Spangenberg et al., 2002). With sustainability as the goal, the use of
indicators for urban monitoring and regulation is becoming more and more in demand (Repetti and
Desthieux, 2006).
The International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, ICLEI, in Department of Town
and Country Planning Peninsular Malaysia (2005) explain that indicators; a measure that gives a
summary of information about a subject or a description of the problem. Indicators used to show trends
and provide quantitative and qualitative information. Indicators are also one of measuring tools that
can be used effectively to enable interested parties; to assess the achievement of a community, the
community or a city. Sustainability indicators and indices may serve as compasses on the journey to
urban sustainability. They are useful tools for evaluating, reporting and reorienting progress towards
sustainable development (Mega, 2010).
Malaysia Urban Indicators Network or also known as Murni Net is developed by the Federal
Department of Town and Country Planning Peninsular Malaysia, Ministry of Housing and Local
Government Malaysia. The system serves as an approach that is able to measure the sustainability of a
city and region through the 11 planning sectors. Those eleven (11) planning sectors are divided into
fifty five (55) urban indicators. This approach is implemented by all Local Authorities in Malaysia.
The total fifty five (55) indicators used as an overall indication of the sustainability of the city are as
following:
No. Planning Sectors Indicators
1 Demography 1. Urbanization rates
2. Population density
3. Average annual growth rate of population
4. Median age
5. Average household size
2 Housing 6. The ratio of house price to income

European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 25, Number 1(2011)
79
7. The ratio of house rent to income
8. The ratio of floor space per one person
9. The percentage of housing stock
3 Urban Economics 10. Unemployment rate
11. Employment growth rate
12. The rate of employment growth
13. The poverty rate of population
14. Income distribution (Gini coefficient)
4 Utilities and
Infrastructure 15. Water consumption rate for each population
16. The rate of water loss
17. Percentage of the flood area
18. Average daily garbage collection for each resident
19. Percentage sewerage service (connected) received by residential
5 Public Facilities and
Recreation 20. The ratio of doctor to the population
21.The ratio of total land area of public open space to 1,000 people
22. The ratio of teachers to primary school student
23. The ratio of pre-school to the population
24. The ratio of halls to the population
6 Environment 25.Percentage of financial allocation for environmental management
26. The ratio of cases of asthma to 10,000 population
27.Percentage allocation of financial for landscaping program
28. Water quality index (WQI)
29.Percentage of area receiving garbage collection services
30. Percentage of solid waste recycling
31.The number of noise complaints received in a year
32.The ratio of cases of waterborne diseases and food to 10,000 population
7 Sociology and Social
Impact 33.Percentage of population participation in community programs
34. The quality of health services
35. The ratio of index crimes to 10,000 people
36. The ratio of juvenile cases to 10,000 people
37. The ratio of arrest cases (social problem) to 1,000 population
38. The rate of divorce to 1,000 households
8 Land Use 39.Percentage approval of Certificate Fitness for Occupancy
40. Percentage of passing land for community facilities
41. Percentage of residential floor area in the city
9 Heritage and Tourism 42. The percentage of expenditure for maintenance and the beautification of the
tourist attractions area
43.The percentage of attractions area
10 Transport and
Accessibility 44. Percentage of public transport users
45. The quality of public bus services
46. Percentage of expenditure to improve the accessibility system
47. The percentage of private cars without passenger in central city during peak hour
in the morning
48. The ratio of the number of road accidents to 10,000 people
49. The percentage of cases involving fatal accidents
11 Management and Finance 50. Local revenue per capita
51. The rate of tax collection
52. The ratio of flow to the emoluments
53. Expenditure per capita
54.The ratio of officers to population groups and associations
55. Percentage of operating expenditure over revenue
Source: Federal Department of Town and Country Planning Peninsular Malaysia
In 2004, the efforts to provide a set of indicators of sustainable development has been disclosed
with the intention of using it as tools to ensure that the planning and development give positive impact

European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 25, Number 1(2011)
to society and reduce problems related to the natural environment. Some set of sustainability indicators
are use, by using data as a key reference in the analysis of the sustainability of the area. The results of
analysis will be used by the government to focus on follow-up process for solving the problem and
issues in the planning and development. Through its implementation, a question raised in respect of the
effectiveness of the system by using the indicators since its launched seven years ago.
According to the Department of Town and Country Planning Peninsular Malaysia (2004), there
are five main stages in the implementation of Murni Net System in Local Authority as shown in Figure
1 below.
Figure 1: The Process of MURNI Net Implementation
Information and Data
Collection
Preparation of Database
Preparation of Technical
Report
Preparation of Town Report
Meeting by
Local Authority
or State Town
and Country
Planning with
agencies that
have been
involve
Agencies will give required
data on the other meeting
and Local Aut
hority will
key in the data on the Murni
Net System (in the meeting)
Data were entered into the
system will be sent to the
Department of Town and
Country Planning
Peninsular Malaysia to
assess whether it exceed the
requirement or not
If the data has met the
requirements, the decision
will be taken to the National
Physical Council for
agreeing the marks of
sustainability that have been
issued
by Murni Net System
The decision will be taken
and be announced a
t the
World Town Planning Day
and the cities that achieve
sustainability will be given
award
1
2
3
4
5
After the implementation of urban indicators by Local Authorities for their respective cities, the
results of the scores for each indicator will be added to get the final scores for the urban indicators
which have been used. Generally, scores can be divided into three scales. First scale is zero percent (0
%) to fifty percent (50%) is for not sustainable city. For city that achieve semi-sustainable city, overall
score on the system is between fifty percent (50%) to eighty percent (80%) while the score for a
sustainable city is between eighty percent (80%) to hundred percent (100%). Overall score will only be
summed up after the data for the urban indicators are key-in and will be processed by the system
automatically. Finally, after analyzing by the system, the overall mark will be displayed. Table 1 shows
the number of cities that achieved score as sustainability city based on results from Murni Net System
from year 2004 until 2010.

European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 25, Number 1(2011)
81
Table 1: The Number of Local Authorities Administrative Area that Achieved Score as Sustainability City by
Year 2004 – 2010
Year No. of Cities Used Murni Net
System
No. of Cities Score as
Sustainable City Percentage (%)
2004 8 0 0
2005 15 2 13.33
2006 14 1 7.14
2007 47 5 10.64
2008 59 9 15.25
2009 101 29 28.71
2010 105 49 46.67
Source: MURNI Net Gateway, 2011
Table 1 show the increasing number of cities used Murni Net since the system started in year
2004. The number of cities that score marks between eighty percent (80%) to hundred percent (100%)
also increase to 49 cities to be awarded as sustainable city. Table 2 below shows the changes in the top
ranking for the cities that achieve score as sustainable city by Murni Net System. The highest scores
was Malacca that achieved the top three ranked for four years continuously as sustainable city. It also
shows that each of the cities, regardless of the administrative level has a probability to achieve
sustainable city by implementing Murni Net System.
Table 2: Top 3 Sustainability City by Year
Year Ranking
One Two Three
2004 None
2005 Malacca Kuala Lumpur None
2006 Malacca None None
2007 Jelebu Malacca Tapah
2008 Rompin Shah Alam Malacca
2009 Labis Bentong Mersing
2010 Kulim Putrajaya Shah Alam
Source: MURNI Net Gateway, 2011
2. Materials and Methods
The selected studies areas were based on proportional stratified sampling and simple random sampling
techniques. Based on the sampling techniques, 7 cities under three level of local authority
administrative area were selected and divided into two categories such as five cities are sustainable and
the others are categorized as semi-sustainable city. The cities that selected as a sample of the research
are shown in Table 3.
Table 3: Selected City under Local Authority Administrative Area
Sustainable City Semi-Sustainable City
Georgetown Ipoh
Sepang Teluk Intan
Selama Tangkak
Batu Pahat
The interview was conducted using open ended questions to the town planning officers who in
charge in processing Murni Net System in the respected local authority area. The study also focused on

European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 25, Number 1(2011)
the number of indicators used by Local Authority in Murni Net System to determine sustainability
level of a city.
3. Results and Discussion
The study has addressed directly to the Local Authorities that play as a key player in the
implementation of Murni Net system. The results showed the effect on the number of urban indicators
used with the sustainability score achievement for a city. Table 4 below describes the usage of urban
indicators by each local authority that represented by the different administrative level.
Table 4: Usage of Murni Net Indicators by Local Authorities
Administrative Level Cities
Usage of Indicators
Several All
% %
City Council Ipoh 14.30
Municipal Council
Batu Pahat 14.30
George-town 14.30
Sepang 14.30
Teluk Intan 14.30
District Council Selama 14.30
Tangkak 14.30
Total 85.70 14.30
According to Table 4, it shows the majority of Local Authorities use only several indicators
from 55 indicators to show the sustainability of the city. This raised the question whether is there any
main reasons that prevent Local Authorities from using all the indicators. Table 5 below describes the
number of indicators used by Local Authorities in determining the sustainability of the city.
Table 5: Indicators Used by Local Authorities
Administrative
Level Cities Urban Indicator Sustainable Level
Used Rejected
City Council Ipoh 41 14 Semi-sustainable
Municipal Council
Batu Pahat 55 0 Sustainable
Georgetown 16 39 Sustainable
Sepang 38 17 Sustainable
Teluk Intan 38 17 Semi-sustainable
District Council Selama 20 35 Sustainable
Tangkak 38 17 Semi-sustainable
Note: The level of urban sustainability using sustainability performance score by 2010 in MURNI Net (2011)
According to the Table 5 above, the findings indicate that the number of urban indicators used
by Local Authorities did not affect the score of sustainability for a city. It can be see through a
comparison made by the different level of Local Authorities that administrate the city. The usage rates
of urban indicators are not optimal causes the need to review the factors which cause the majority of
Local Authorities did not use all the 55 indicators in measuring the sustainability of the city. Table 6
below describes several factors that cause majority of Local Authorities rejects some of the indicators.
The finding shows that 3 Local Authorities choose the indicators from the Murni Net because
of recommendations given by the Department of Town and Country Planning Peninsular Malaysia.
This finding raise questions on the needs of many urban indicators but did not used with optimal and
comprehensively. Besides that, Local Authorities also rejected some of the urban indicators because of
no data or limited data which required from the technical department or agency. Table 6 shows that

European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 25, Number 1(2011)
83
there are 10 main indicators used by Local Authorities in its administrative area to measure the
sustainability of the city. These indicators are capable to be uniform indicator for all Local Authorities
to implement it.
Table 6: The Most Chosen Indicators by Local Authorities
No. Urban Indicators
1 Average daily garbage collection for each resident
2 The ratio of pre-school to the population
3 The ratio of halls to the population
4 The percentage allocation of financial for landscaping program
5 The percentage of area receiving garbage collection services
6 The number of noise complaints received in a year
7 Percentage approval of C.F.O
8 Local revenue per capita
9 The rate of tax collection
10 Expenditure per capita
The 10 indicators outlines above are suitable to serve as uniform indicator for every Local
Authorities whether in the City Council, Municipal Council or District Council. There are 4 indicators
rejected by most Local Authorities and these indicators are potential to be rejected as indicators in the
future system such as the rate of employment growth, income distribution, percentage of public
transport users and the quality of public bus services. Most of the Local Authorities respond that there
is a need to standardize the indicators based on the level of administrative areas. The standardization of
indicators will improve the accuracy of the score and can also determine the level of sustainability of
the city.
4. Conclusion
In a conclusion, the implementation of Murni Net is a suitable approach to measure the sustainability
of a city. However, based on the study conducted, there are still some problems on the system. It
should be improved to increase the efficiency of the system. Several proposals have been formulated to
create a new injection for this system. The main goal for this proposal is to increase efficiency in the
implementation by Local Authorities in the future. The proposals include a number of uniform
indicators that are closely related to the determination of sustainability criteria and types of data needed
to meet the system requirements.
References
[1] Blackburn, W.R., 2007. “The Sustainability Handbook: The Complete Management Guide to
Achieving Social, Economic and Environmental Responsibility”. Cromwell Press,United
States.
[2] Bell, S. and Morse, S., 2003. “Measuring Sustainability”. Earthscan Publication Limited.
[3] Brandon, P.S., and Lombardi, P., 2005. “Evaluating Sustainable Development”. Black Well
Publishing.
[4] Dernbach, J.C., 2002. “Stumbling Toward Sustainability”. Environmental Law Institute, United
States.
[5] Department of Town and Country Planning of Peninsular Malaysia and Ministry of Housing
and Local Government Malaysia, 2005. ”Guidelines and User Guide of Malaysian Urban
Indicators (MURNI Net)”. Town and Country Planning of Peninsular Malaysia and Ministry of
Housing and Local Government Malaysia, Malaysia.

European Journal of Social Sciences – Volume 25, Number 1(2011)
[6] Department of Town and Country Planning Peninsular Malaysia and Ministry of Housing and
Local Government Malaysia, 2006. ”National Urbanization Policy (DPN)”. Malaysia National
Libraries, Malaysia.
[7] Department of Town and Country Planning Peninsular Malaysia, 2011. ”MURNI Net
Gateway”. Retrieved January 14, 2011 from www.townplan.gov.my/murninet/.
[8] Hasna, A.M., 2007. “Dimensions of Sustainability”. Journal of Engineering for Sustainable
Development: Energy, Environment, and Health 2, pp. 47–57.
[9] Irina, G. Malkina-Pykh., 2002. “Integrated Assessment Models And Response Function
Models:Pros And Cons For Sustainable Development Indices Design”. Journal of Ecological
Indicator.
[10] Lomberg, M., 2004. “Healthy Cities: Improving Urban Life (Understanding Global Life)”.
Weigh Publishers Inc, Malaysia.
[11] Mega, V.P., 2010. “Sustainable Cities for the Third Millennium: The Odyssey of Urban
Excellence”. Springer and Business Media, London.
[12] Sinha, P.C., 1998. “Sustainable Development: International Encyclopedia of Sustainable
Development Series”. Anmol Publications Private Limited, New Delhi.
[13] The International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, ICLEI., 1996. “The Local
Agenda 21 Planning Guide: An Introduction to Sustainable Development Planning”. The
International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI), The International
Development Research Centre (IDRC) and the United Nations Environment Programme
(UNEP), Toronto.