1. IntroductionThe period of the mi

1. Introduction
The period of the mid-seventies saw a new development reorientation with a vital policy transformation in regional development planning. The focus switched from the notion of industrialization and inter-regional inequalities to inter-sectoral imbalances. Under the influence of this new direction, the general policy of the early seventies shifted towards poverty reduction and employment, and gave a greater priority to rural development. In
conjunction with that, the new strategies were formulated as part of the regional development models with a prominent concern for integrated rural development. One such strategy of fostering rural development within the framework of regional development planning is the introduction of the Traditional Village Development Approach in the regions of Malaysia. The purpose of this paper is to examine the overall Malaysian regional development policy which have been adopted over the last thirty years, and to determine how far this approach is considerably successful, by taking PERDA (Penang Regional Development Authority) as a case, in achieving the stated objectives.
1.1 Regional Planning in Malaysia
The pursuit of national development in Malaysia was fundamentally prompted and spurred by the desire to promote and enhance the social and economic well-being of the people. The major objective of regional development is the reduction of disparities in development among regions. The policy statements have spelled this out in every one of Malaysia’s five-year development plans, since The Second Malaysia Plan (1971-1975) until to date.
To achieve the various goals of regional development, a number of strategies have been adopted in Malaysia. Basically four important strategies can be identified as; resource and new land development, in-situ rural development, industrial dispersal, and rural urbanization and creation of new growth centres (Alden & Awang, 1985). The main focus of regional development has been on the opening of new land development schemes in the poorest states. A system of growth centres and corridor development was to be used to decentralize industrial development and dispersion into the less developed states (Salih & Young, 1988). The question of why regional
development had limited success is certainly correlated with the problems of the growth pole strategy. When the empirically untested concept was translated into plans and policies, there was great lack of precision, and even the type of propulsive industries to be located at the growth pole was not known (Friedmann & Weaver, 1979). One mistake which came out of this experience was that the hinterland had to be developed in order that the growth pole succeeds, rather than the other way around. Therefore the concept that the growth centre will have
spread effects to the peripheral areas is not always right.
The establishments of new townships in all the Regional Development Authority areas are also unsuccessful. There were not enough facilities, and limited off-farm employment opportunities. There was also a mismatch between physical development, such as high-standard buildings and infrastructural facilities with the needs of the local environment. In some areas there was no balance between the number of residential units and commercial facilities provided. At this stage it also became clear that the population of the traditional villages surrounding
the Regional Development Authorities were not attracted to these new townships as expected.
Choguill (1985) analyzed the potential and limitations of the new towns in generating economic growth in the KETENGAH region. Even with the availability of basic infrastructure facilities, the study showed that the new towns have still not reached the stage of self-generating growth which was expected of them. In order to enhance the new towns, Choguill further suggested the need for an appropriate agricultural policy as well as adequate consideration of their economic base. Noorizan (1992), examined the actual problems of implementing the new land development scheme in the JENGKA region. The study concluded that the regional development projects did improve the socio-economic conditions of the settlers, including their income and standard of living.
However the study also indicated that the younger generation intends to migrate to other areas for better job opportunities rather than to continue their parents’ work. However it is not entirely true that the regional development and growth centre strategies adopted by Malaysia
did not have any significant impact especially on urbanization and regional decentralization. The Penang case is an outstanding example of a natural growth pole, through labor immigration and other inter-urban linkages with its hinterland region (Salih & Young, 1985).
Another successful impact of regional strategies is the growth of small towns resulting from developments in a hinterland region. An immediate case is the impact of the Muda Agricultural Development Authority which is concerned with irrigation and double-cropping of rice on the growth of lower-order centres, essentially central places, in the MADA region. Therefore the overall assessment of regional development strategies and their impact in Malaysia seem to be rather mixed. However, in general, it is clear that regional development strategies cannot have the expected results unless sustained by, and integrated with the overall development strategies.
2. The Traditional Village Development Approach
The approach was first implemented at the end of 1984. Under this concept, there are three main aspects that have been emphasized to increase the quality and agricultural productivity through consolidation of individual small farms and paddy fields using the modern production techniques and management; to create the village industries, small industries and other non-agriculture economic activities and to restructure and regroup the scattered village into one proper settlement and equipped with basic facilities. As a result, a new growth centre is created in the rural area.
The conceptual development approach was to be implemented to achieve two main objectives; to enhance the income and standard of living and also to restructure the rural society. PERDA has already identified 26 areas inclusive of a few villages to be modernized and develop by using this strategy. PERDA has also identified five specific programmes that have to be coordinated in each village in order to accomplish the two main objectives of the approach; i) agricultural development, ii) infrastructure development, iii) housing development and urbanization, iv) industrial development and investment, v) training and community development.

Hasil (Melayu) 1:

1. pengenalanTempoh pertengahan tahun tujuh-puluhan menyaksikan reorientation pembangunan baru dengan transformasi dasar penting dalam perancangan pembangunan Wilayah. Fokus beralih dari konsep perindustrian dan antara rantau ketaksamaan kepada ketidakseimbangan antara sektor. Di bawah pengaruh arah baru ini, dasar umum puluhan awal beralih ke arah pengurangan kemiskinan dan pekerjaan, dan memberi lebih keutamaan kepada pembangunan luar bandar. Dalamserentak dengan itu, strategi-strategi baru telah dirangka sebagai sebahagian daripada model-model Pembangunan Wilayah dengan kebimbangan yang menonjol untuk pembangunan luar bandar bersepadu. Satu strategi tersebut memupuk pembangunan luar bandar dalam rangka perancangan pembangunan Wilayah adalah pengenalan pendekatan pembangunan Kampung tradisional di rantau Malaysia. Kertas ini bertujuan untuk meneliti dasar Malaysia keseluruhannya pembangunan wilayah yang telah diguna pakai sejak tiga puluh tahun, dan untuk menentukan sejauh mana pendekatan ini adalah agak berjaya, dengan mengambil PERDA (Penang Regional Development Authority) sebagai kes, bagi mencapai matlamat yang dinyatakan.1.1 Wilayah perancangan di MalaysiaThe pursuit of national development in Malaysia was fundamentally prompted and spurred by the desire to promote and enhance the social and economic well-being of the people. The major objective of regional development is the reduction of disparities in development among regions. The policy statements have spelled this out in every one of Malaysia’s five-year development plans, since The Second Malaysia Plan (1971-1975) until to date.To achieve the various goals of regional development, a number of strategies have been adopted in Malaysia. Basically four important strategies can be identified as; resource and new land development, in-situ rural development, industrial dispersal, and rural urbanization and creation of new growth centres (Alden & Awang, 1985). The main focus of regional development has been on the opening of new land development schemes in the poorest states. A system of growth centres and corridor development was to be used to decentralize industrial development and dispersion into the less developed states (Salih & Young, 1988). The question of why regionaldevelopment had limited success is certainly correlated with the problems of the growth pole strategy. When the empirically untested concept was translated into plans and policies, there was great lack of precision, and even the type of propulsive industries to be located at the growth pole was not known (Friedmann & Weaver, 1979). One mistake which came out of this experience was that the hinterland had to be developed in order that the growth pole succeeds, rather than the other way around. Therefore the concept that the growth centre will havespread effects to the peripheral areas is not always right.The establishments of new townships in all the Regional Development Authority areas are also unsuccessful. There were not enough facilities, and limited off-farm employment opportunities. There was also a mismatch between physical development, such as high-standard buildings and infrastructural facilities with the needs of the local environment. In some areas there was no balance between the number of residential units and commercial facilities provided. At this stage it also became clear that the population of the traditional villages surroundingthe Regional Development Authorities were not attracted to these new townships as expected.Choguill (1985) analyzed the potential and limitations of the new towns in generating economic growth in the KETENGAH region. Even with the availability of basic infrastructure facilities, the study showed that the new towns have still not reached the stage of self-generating growth which was expected of them. In order to enhance the new towns, Choguill further suggested the need for an appropriate agricultural policy as well as adequate consideration of their economic base. Noorizan (1992), examined the actual problems of implementing the new land development scheme in the JENGKA region. The study concluded that the regional development projects did improve the socio-economic conditions of the settlers, including their income and standard of living.However the study also indicated that the younger generation intends to migrate to other areas for better job opportunities rather than to continue their parents’ work. However it is not entirely true that the regional development and growth centre strategies adopted by Malaysiadid not have any significant impact especially on urbanization and regional decentralization. The Penang case is an outstanding example of a natural growth pole, through labor immigration and other inter-urban linkages with its hinterland region (Salih & Young, 1985).Another successful impact of regional strategies is the growth of small towns resulting from developments in a hinterland region. An immediate case is the impact of the Muda Agricultural Development Authority which is concerned with irrigation and double-cropping of rice on the growth of lower-order centres, essentially central places, in the MADA region. Therefore the overall assessment of regional development strategies and their impact in Malaysia seem to be rather mixed. However, in general, it is clear that regional development strategies cannot have the expected results unless sustained by, and integrated with the overall development strategies.2. The Traditional Village Development ApproachThe approach was first implemented at the end of 1984. Under this concept, there are three main aspects that have been emphasized to increase the quality and agricultural productivity through consolidation of individual small farms and paddy fields using the modern production techniques and management; to create the village industries, small industries and other non-agriculture economic activities and to restructure and regroup the scattered village into one proper settlement and equipped with basic facilities. As a result, a new growth centre is created in the rural area.The conceptual development approach was to be implemented to achieve two main objectives; to enhance the income and standard of living and also to restructure the rural society. PERDA has already identified 26 areas inclusive of a few villages to be modernized and develop by using this strategy. PERDA has also identified five specific programmes that have to be coordinated in each village in order to accomplish the two main objectives of the approach; i) agricultural development, ii) infrastructure development, iii) housing development and urbanization, iv) industrial development and investment, v) training and community development.