Locally Based Approach for Prefabricated Housing- Case Study: Indonesia

On May 27, 2006 more than 5000 people perished in a 6.3 magnitude earthquakein Yogyakarta and Central Java, Indonesia. The earthquake destroyed100,000 homes and damaged more than 200,000 additional structures. Theneed for shelter was made worse by the fact that shelter prior to the quake wasalso needed for the homeless population in these two areas. Many countriesand organizations provided assistance in the form of food, medicine, funds,shelter and also housing. The organization “Dome for the World” built a newvillage in Yogyakarta with bubble-shaped prefabricated houses. These 71 shelters,along with public facilities such as a Mosque, a primary school, a healthcenter, and bathing/sanitary facilities, successfully provided earthquake reliefin surrounding villages and towns.By contrast, similar dome-shaped emergency shelters were installed in thedevastating 1972 earthquake in Managua, Nicaragua. In that instance, theBayer Corporation provided 500 houses of which only 30% were ultimately occupied.The failure of these houses could be attributed to two main concerns:(1) disaster victims, prior to the installation of disaster relief, found a way toerect their own houses, and (2) the morphology of the dwelling did not adaptwell to the cultural conditions of the Managuans. A similar failed attempt withdome dwelling structures also witnessed in Kutahya, Turkey in 1970. Like theNicaraguan situation, it was suspected that the form and shape of the shelterwere contributing factors to the lack of architecture’s success.1The dome village in Nglepen, Yogyakarta is still occupied today. One of possiblereasons is due to the ability for its users to modify and adapt their housesaccording to specific, local needs. This factor of customization appears to be asignificant factor toward the success of these prefabricated units.This paper aims to analyze and learned from the Yogyakarta, Managua, andKutahya situations. It will use the basic theory and history of prefabricationas a way to understand the cultural successes and failures of the dome housetype. It should be mentioned that prefabricated housing is not popular in Indonesia.However, due to the high demand for housing, sociological factorsplayed against opportunity and need create a certain acceptance, tolerance,or perhaps appreciation of this kind of temporary shelter. Can we assume,given the Indonesian example, that a locally based cultural approach to housingand form provides an appropriate case study to measure the successfulapplication of prefabricated means in architecture? A locally based approachand potential application for prefabricated industrial processes might prove asa viable solution for such urgent building needs. The aim of this paper is toanalyze the history, technology, and morphology of small-scale prefabricateddome construction as a way to expose the successes of the Yogyakarta situation.Simultaneously a comparative analysis with parallel scenarios resultingin less than successful results will serve as the counterpoint and lesson tobalance this Indonesian example.1 One of the important sources for this topic originates from Edward Pandelakiand Yoshimitsu Shiozki’s research on New-Ngelepen housing.This proposal aims to foreground in more detail the contributions thatprefabrication itself played in the success of the Yogyakarta recovery effortsand the lasting effects of the dwelling reconstruction. See E. Pandelakiand Y. Shiozaki, “Social Sustainability of New-Ngelepen DomeHousing as Post-Disaster Housing Reconstruction of Central Java-YogyakartaEarthquake 2006,” conference paper presented at 21st EAROPHWorld Planning and Human Settlement Congress & Mayors’ Caucus,October 2008, Egret Himeiji and Awaji Yumebutai International ConferenceCenter, Japan.

Volume Editors
John Quale, Rashida Ng & Ryan E. Smith

ISBN
978-0-935502-85-5