Publication Search

This study aims to determine and describe the strategy model for increasing the Village Development Index (IDM) in Ciamis Regency, with a focus on environmental resilience, economic resilience, and social resilience. The method used is qualitative descriptive research. The results of the study indicate that the strategy model for increasing IDM in Ciamis Regency still needs improvement in several aspects. In terms of environmental resilience, although there is no pollution, both underdeveloped and developing villages have the potential to be prone to landslides, with developing villages having disaster response efforts, while underdeveloped villages do not. In terms of economic resilience, developing villages show better livelihood diversity compared to underdeveloped villages, although both have sufficient access to trade facilities, but access to financial institutions is limited. In terms of social resilience, although access to education and health is relatively good in both types of villages, the BPJS membership rate is still low, and access to clean water, sanitation, and electricity has reached 100% in developing villages. Access to information and communication already exists, but is not optimal in both villages. This study concludes that increasing IDM requires strengthening environmental, economic, and social resilience that is more integrated and targeted.

This study aims to determine and describe the strategy model for increasing the Village Development Index (IDM) seen from environmental resilience, economic resilience, and social resilience. This study uses a qualitative descriptive method. The results of the study indicate that the strategy model for increasing the IDM from environmental resilience is still less than optimal in underdeveloped villages and developing villages. Although developing villages are better than underdeveloped villages, there are several problems such as potential disasters that have not been handled properly, especially landslides. In terms of economic resilience, developing village communities have a better diversity of livelihoods than underdeveloped villages. Access to trade facilities and financial institutions is limited in both villages, although developing villages have alternatives through BUMDes. In terms of social resilience, access to education and health in both villages is quite good, although the BPJS membership rate is still low. In terms of housing, developing villages have recorded almost equal access to clean water, sanitation, and electricity, while underdeveloped villages have not reached 100%. Access to information and communication in both villages is available, but not yet optimal.