Majalah Ilmiah UNIKOM
Vol.7, No. 2
205
H a l a m a n
less worked if it is not supported by politi-
cal will or government commitment. Al-
though only economically established
country can be carrying out certification
process such as eco labeling ISO 14041–
14043 by way of sort of instrument such
as LCA. Nevertheless as part of global ar-
chitectural community, Indonesia should
be involving themselves by minimizing
environmental impacts as consequences
of the existences of architecture, if do not
want to be alienated.
Applying tropical architecture, energy con-
servation, using local material, awareness
of preservation, revitalization, and renova-
tion on designs besides create them as
manifestation of traditional wisdom, which
is expressing Indonesian architecture and
architects involvement, intrinsically has
been in sustainable spirit.
However, it should be better if the involve-
ment carried out systematically and holis-
tic by considering building–life–cycle from
raw materials extraction until end of life of
the building in every architectural design
process, in context building as product of
system of architecture.
CONCLUSIONS
By keep considering building–life–cycle
within an architectural process, it means
that we are constantly making up life qual-
ity into a better one under economic de-
pression that growing harder, as conse-
quences of the decreasing of environ-
mental quality and limitation natural re-
sources particularly non–renewable en-
ergy resources.
As a part of industrial construction, which
always relate with energy producing, archi-
tecture suppose to do something in regard
with this situation, and it has been proofed
by concerns from a number of architec-
tural theorists and practitioners about the
stated problems.
According to this discourse, there would be
uneasiness for some architects. Neverthe-
less, we no need to worry about the mat-
ters. Concerning about the building–life–
cycle within system of architecture means
analyzing energy, cost, and other environ-
mental impacts that would be spent and
occur along the building–life–cycle.
However, analysis by using a cradle–to–
grave based instrument such as LCA is not
a paradigm shifting of strategies or archi-
tectural design methods but it is more to
be parallel, side–by–side, and a comple-
mentary process.
Inherently, architectural planning and de-
signing still produce designs that are re-
lated to the creation of value or meaning
with the intention of arousing users‟ emo-
tion and sensitivity.
On the other hands, estimate life cycle of
the building along an architectural process
in context building as product of system of
architecture, offering designs that can
minimize environmental impacts as conse-
quences of building–life–cycle, or designs
that associated with quality and reliable
issues.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Abioso, Wanita Subadra (1999), Krite-
ria Rancangan Arsitektur Dalam Kon-
teks Pembangunan Berkelanjutan, Pro-
gram Magister Teknik Arsitektur, Pro-
gram Pasca Sarjana, Institut Teknologi
Bandung.
2. Amos, Jonathan, Energy crisis „will limit
births', BBC News Online science staff,
in Seattle,
3. Frosch, Robert (1995), The Industrial
Ecology of The 21
st
Century, Scientific
American.
4.
H t t p : / / w w w . c f d . r m i t . e d u . a u /
Publications/papers/LCA-CR.html
5. Handler, A. Benjamin (1970), Systems
Approach to Architecture, New York:
American Elsevier Publishing Company,
Inc.
6. Holdway and Walker, (2004), Http://
w w w . w e e e m a n . o r g / h t m l / w h a t /
7. Steele, James (1997), Sustainable Ar-
chitecture, Principles, Paradigms, and