RESEARCH ARTICLE | NOVEMBER 14 2017

Implementation of Ecohouse and ecoliving concept in

architecture - SASAK traditional settlement 
Agus Zulkarnain Arief; Achmad Tutut Subadyo

AIP Conf. Proc. 1903, 080014 (2017)

[Link]


View Export
Online Citation

25 May 2024 [Link]

 Implementation of Ecohouse and Ecoliving Concept in
Architecture - SASAK Traditional Settlement
Agus Zulkarnain Arief 1, a) and Achmad Tutut Subadyo2, b)
1
Lecturer Department of Architecture, Engineering Faculty University of Merdeka Malang
2
Lecturer Department of Architecture, Engineering Faculty University of Merdeka Malang
a)
Corresponding author: [Link]@[Link]
b)
[Link]@[Link]

Abstract. Sasak is one of the Indonesian indigenous tribes who live in the island of Lombok. Until now, they still
maintain the customs and culture as well as settling in Sembalun, Senaru, Segenter, and Sade. The Large of Sasak
traditional settlement area in Lombok is not increased so that it feared the carrying capacity will be exceeded and could
lead to a shift of customs and culture. This paper (1) to formulate the concept of a traditional Sasak sustainability
settlement, (2) reconstruct the conception and typology of layout, mass configuration, space-organization, structure and
building construction homes custom of Sasak, to analyze the sustainability level of Sasak traditional settlement used
questionnaires Community Sustainability Analysis. The results obtained in this study is the traditional settlement of the

25 May 2024 [Link]

Sasak people - PTSDS is in conformity with the Eco village concept of Global Eco village Network. It is evident from
the analysis of data by CSA which finds the total in 1226; with the value of the ecological aspect, the social aspect and
the spiritual aspect, respectively 432, 373 and 421, which means the Sasak people - PTSDS shows very good progress on
sustainability.

PRELIMINARY
Conditions traditional settlements that exist in Indonesia explored the values and the principles of excellence and
compliance with ecological design. Until now, most of these communities still maintain the customs and culture and
modernization have not been affected. With their traditional settlement site conditions are not increased, and the
population continues to grow, feared to tread carrying capacity will be exceeded. Therefore, the conceptual model is
needed to maintain the sustainability of Sasak traditional settlements. Cultural treasures such as Sasak traditional
settlement should be stabilized its sustainability that based on the concept Ecohouse and ecoliving so it can be
passed on to future generations. Research on ecological home communities and ecological life has never been done
in the Sasak traditional settlement. With this study will determine the level of sustainability of Sasak traditional
settlements in ecological aspects, social and cultural / spiritual. In addition it will be known local values and
compliance to ecological design concept in terms of aspects of thermal comfort and illumination. The existence and
sustainability are important for the stabilization of the design model formulated for Sasak traditional settlement, this
one of the nation's property assets which are invaluable

Sasak Settlement and Its Space Layout

The formation of a traditional Sasak village on the island of Lombok usually starts from a group of people (tribe)
which form a small village then more and more perfect (Subadyo, 2003). The existence of the traditional village
tends to spread up the hills or even at the foot of the mountain, which occurs because of the inter-tribal clashes,
beliefs, etc., so as to escape from the pursuit of the enemy, they had to look for places that are difficult to reach
(Sulistianto, 2005). Sasak traditional village on the island of Lombok is composed of a number of custom homes,

Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Construction and Building Engineering (ICONBUILD) 2017
AIP Conf. Proc. 1903, 080014-1–080014-9; [Link]
Published by AIP Publishing. 978-0-7354-1591-1/$30.00

080014-1
buildings berugak, rice container buildings (barn), cattle pens and the surrounding environment. Spatial Sasak
village is basically a miniature sort of arrangement that is larger than the spatial Regions (Subadyo, 2003; Auliya,
2009).
In the Sasak tradisioanal settlement on Lombok Island, there are several function rooms or buildings. Research
Auliya (2009) on Sasak settlement in Senaru confirm that the concept of seniority in settlement patterns, and the
formation of the spatial structure based cultural ritual are still deeply rooted in the indigenous Sasak. The difference
of space and building function are implemented in the regional arrangement, settlements as well as the arrangement
of buildings, including homes. Arrangement of buildings on the traditional Sasak settlement, also known as the land
and building use for personal, social and coupled with a sacred function (Sulistianto, 2005; Auliya, 2009). Study
Sabrina (2010) on the preservation of settlement patterns traditional Sasak strengthening the existence of spatial
structure traditional settlement Sasak formed based on the concept of the philosophy of the trajectory of the sun, the
concept of the Mount Rinjani, the orientation direction toward and layout of the topography of terraces and the
concept of home form uniform stood in a row (Suteran). Based on the configuration of the masses, the pattern and
shape of the whole building oriented towards Mount Rinjani which is a manifestation of the imaginary cosmic line
based on the belief system of the Sasak people against where the ancestral spirits reside as well as the symbol of the
interaction of the society with its cosmological environment is interpreted through the traditional house (Subadyo,
2003; Sabrina, 2010). Similarly, the results of Fitriya (2010) study in Bayan - North Lombok, explained that the
pattern of settlements in Indigenous Village Bayan there is a division of areas based on social stratification societal.
In addition there is a division of space in the environment where living, and the formation of spatial patterns based
on traditional activities that are still implemented by the community of Bayan traditional Village.

Sasak Traditional Architecture

Technology owned by the Sasak tribe on the island of Lombok is still relatively simple, but highly uphold the
wisdom of the environment. Sasak traditional building structure is a frame system made of wood in the form of a
beam and a rectangular pole. While the wall coverings made of woven bamboo (chamber), which is left on the

25 May 2024 [Link]

original color and character. Building construction is connected using a bonding system, pedestal, pegs, interlocking
pedestal and linked joints. In addition to the above mentioned system it is prohibited for use (Subadyo, 2003).
Building materials used to tie a connection are rattan and bamboo materials. Construction of roof coverings used
Rumbia, which is supported by bamboo construction and is tied with the use of fibers or bamboo. For Sasak
indigenous communities to build houses or other buildings, it must start with the intention and this is considered as a
sacred act, meaning that it must be taken into account the necessary conditions (Subadyo, 2003; Sulistianto, 2005).
Usually these conditions include: how to choose building materials, requirements and restrictions on building a
house, facing the house, choosing a good day and doing selamatan. In addition to the architecture of traditional
house buildings, berugak is one of the traditional buildings that became a means of socialization conducted by the
community of Sasak tribe with others or also function as a place of gathering, discussion or in the implementation of
traditional ceremonies. Berugak is a stage-shaped building without any partitions except on the south side (Subadyo,
2003; Sulistianto, 2005). While the barn is a traditional building Sasak tribe that is also widely found in many
villages on the island of Lombok. The existence of barns is not only used as a place to store rice during harvest, but
the barns is also used as a sign of the level of one's caste (Subadyo, 2003; Sulistianto, 2005). The highest form of
barns is only for the nobility. Establishment of settlement patterns based on Sasak customary rules passed down
from generation to generation becomes something that attracts the attention of outsiders. In arranging Sasak
traditional house and its elements have a pattern of lined (bale, berugak, barns, cages, all lined in a straight line).
Overall residential buildings have the same direction facing, ie facing East / West (Sasongko, 2005). This is in line
with the study conducted by Subadyo (2003), which stated that the traditional house of Sasak is one of the cultural
forms of the community that has special characteristics and is not less unique to the traditional houses of other
regions. Sasak traditional house vertically is a reflection of the division of the universe. The legs or poles symbolize
the underworld (the dark world, hell), the body or the walls and the spaces within them symbolize the middle world
(the world of the universe's life) and the roof symbolizes the world above (eternal world, heaven).

Ecological House, Ecological Life and Ecological village

Environmentally friendly and efficient development systems in resource use, called ecological homes (Frick &
Darmawan, 2008; Widyarti, 2011). Achievement of the build can be done through an integrated approach in design.

080014-2
Home building (sustainable building) interpreted also as an ecological house. The benefits achieved from the
application of the concept of ecological house is a reduction in operating costs (energy and water), improving
occupant health by improving air quality inside buildings, and reduce environmental impacts (minimizing the impact
of waste and heating in the building). 'Ecological life' (ecoliving) is the life to commit to a better way of life by
taking account of and responsible for the environment in order to create ecologically sustainable living (Seo, 2001;
The UNSW Ecoliving Center, 2006). This concept is a derivative of 'ecovillage' developed as a lifestyle choice in
either rural or urban societies by integrating the overall environmental sustainability of society. Looking at aspects
of ecological design, permaculture, ecological building, alternative energy, water efficiency, and so on (GEN, 2000).
Indonesia traditionally has had a philosophy regarding the protection of natural resources so that they can live in a
sustainable ecosystem (Arifin et al. 2003). “'Ecological life' (ecoliving) can also be realized in the form of lifestyle
because with a healthy lifestyle and attention to human wisdom and policy in applying the results of existing
technology to harvest the potential of natural resources and the environment that can produce an environmentally
sustainable life. The definition of the 'ecological village' used by the Global Eco-villages Network (GEN) (2000);
Widyarti, (2011) is; Quality full-featured settlement where the inhabitants' activities are integrated with nature and
support the development of human health and can last indefinitely. This approach to achieve this dream is what is
then called 'ecological village' (Gilman, 1991). Further, Widyarti, (2011) states that ecological dimensionless
development principles in ecological village are: (1) land use in accordance with its carrying capacity; (2) efficient
utilization of natural resources; (3) a healthy environment; (4) the use of non-toxic local building materials; (5)
preservation of critical vegetation and fauna and natural habitats; (6) optimization of natural energy harvesting; (7)
eco-friendly economic structure system; And (8) application of recycling system to all products used.
This principle of ecological development as the basis for thinking about sustainability with a deep understanding
that all natural resources, both renewable and non-limited, therefore human activity must not exceed the ecosystem
support capacity of the earth (Randia, 2002). White & Masset (2003), states that the high level of sustainability of
the community is determined by the degree of community to be able to affluent and independent.
In order to gain a measure of the sustainability of a community, GEN (2000) developed a concept of how to
audit a sustainability as a basis for assessing individuals, and communities to compare their current status with the

25 May 2024 [Link]

ideal goal of ecological, social and spiritual / quasi-ecological sustainability (Widyarti, 2011 ). The instruments and
analytical units used as action-taking for individuals and communities to become more sustainable are called
Community Sustainability Assessments (CSAs).
Research studies that aims to produce a residential building (house-residential-settlement) is more
environmentally friendly (Widyarti, 2011), among others, research is conducted Kim (2005), Gaitani (2007) and
Mahdavi (2008). Nowadays modern architecture does not have the capacity to control the micro-environment inside
a building without the use of technology that consumes a lot of energy and this will have an impact on
environmental issues. The statement is the conclusion of Kim's (2005) research, about the comparison of
environmental controls in buildings on traditional Korean architecture with modern architecture.
Furthermore, Gaitani (2007) research in Great Athens on the importance of applying architectural bioclimatic
criteria and passive cooling systems and energy conservation principles in order to improve the thermal comfort
conditions on the outside of a building. The background of this research is dissatisfaction with the sensation of
climatic conditions outside the building. The results of the analysis of this study resulted in comparison of
conventional structures with other designs that improve the bioclimatic principle.
Meanwhile Mahdavi (2008) conducted research on occupant activity to control the main climate conditions
thermal inside the building. Roles and functions of building elements such as windows, shade, lighting and heat
sources and fans are usually done to condition the room to achieve the conditions in the building in accordance with
the desired. The results of Mahdavi's (2008) study reinforce that conditioning of microclimate behavior in buildings
and energy savings, through this control, has a very significant impact.

PURPOSE AND RESEARCH BENEFITS

Research purposes
This study aims to assess the sustainable level of Sasak Traditional Settlements in Dusun Senaru (PTSDS),
Bayan District. North Lombok Regency, West Nusa Tenggara Province. In the next stage, the basic concepts and
typology of mass configuration, layout, spatial organization, plan, view, piece, structure and construction of custom
house on PTSDS are used.

080014-3
 Benefits of research
While the benefits of the research results in this first year is to know the level of sustainability of traditional
Sasak settlements in Dusun Senaru in ecological, social and cultural / spiritual aspects (eco-house and eco-village
concept). Besides it can be used to obtain the sustainability driven factor of Sasak traditional village management in
Dusun Senaru as traditional architecture artifact sustainably.

RESEARCH METHOD

Research design
The research to uncover the phenomenon of a sustainability of residential community and traditional architecture
in Indonesia which is characterized in two forms that is physical and nonphysical require specific method of
research that must be able to reveal physical aspect as well as nonphysical aspect so that in this research used
combination of quantitative and qualitative method.

Data collection
In this first year research, secondary data were collected based on a number of representative sources and
relevant to this research topic, while the primary data will be taken directly in the field. Primary data collection will
be conducted through interviews using a questionnaire from CSA (Community Sustainability Assessment).

Data Analysis Method

The Sustainability Analysis used the CSA questionnaire in this first year study to analyze and assess the

25 May 2024 [Link]

sustainability of the Sasak community - PTSDS, in Senaru Village, Bayan District, and North Lombok District. The
data was collected through interviews through Focus Group Discussion (FGD) technique with sample of key
respondents (adat leaders, village elders, and Sasak community leaders in Dusun Senaru). Respondents were
determined by purposive sampling strategy of 30 respondents consisting of 19 heads of households in PTSDS, and 3
elders of sasak, 3 government bureaucrats, and 5 community observers of traditional Sasak settlements. Also
observed the location with tools that will be used is a compass, anemometer, Global Positioning System (GPS).

Overview of Traditional Settlements of Sasak Senaru Village (PTSDS)

The research titled: Implementation of Ecohouse and Ecoliving Concept on Sasak Traditional Settlement
Architecture was conducted in PTSDS community, in Senaru Village Bayan District, North Lombok Regency, West
Nusa Tenggara Province. Geographically, the PTSDS village is located at 115 ° 46 'BT - 116 ° 28' east and between
8 ° 112 '- 8 ° 55' LS. Dusun Senaru is in the administrative area of Senaru Village. The village located at the foot of
Mount Rinjani has advantages when compared with other villages in North Lombok regency. Because it serves as a
climbing gateway to Mount Rinjani, also has some beautiful and charming attractions. The area of the village of
Senaru is 41.62 km2 consisting of 11 hamlets Dasan Baro, Sembilan Batu Dusun, Dusun Telaga Lenggundi, Dusun
Kebaloan, Dusun Bon Gontor, Dusun Oma Segoar, Dusun Lokaq Klungkung, Dusun Tumpangsari, Dusun Pawang
Kreok, Dusun Lendang Cempaka, and Dusun Senaru.
Indigenous village of PTSDS located at the foot of Mount Rinjani, in this PTSDS live mostly Sasak indigenous
people. This village has an area of about 5,500 m2 consisting of 19 traditional houses. PTSDS village is about 90 km
away. To reach the location of PTSDS from the city of Mataram can pass through 2 lanes, namely the west and east
lanes. The western route is also divided into 2, namely the path through the coast of Senggigi and the path through
the Pusuk protected forest. East line through Labuhan Lombok.
Physical conditions, PTSDS is part of the slopes of Mount Rinjani located at an altitude of 600 mdpl and with a
hilly landscape or mountain slopes and rainfall 2379 mm / year. In general, land use is land for wetland, dry land,
yard, and others. Most of the area is used for dry land that is 3,524 hectares. The designation of the yard in Senaru
village has an area of 36.6 hectares. The environment in PTSDS when viewed from the conditions of rainfall,
hydrological and commodities shows that environmental conditions support the efforts of the preservation of Senaru

080014-4
village which has an agricultural base. Soil type and climate support for sustainability of agriculture on site. Land
use PTSDS, consisting of settlement, yard, and cattle pen. Types of land use are small and limited in addition to the
small size of the village and there are customary regulations that bind. The dominance of land use in PTSDS is a
residential area consisting of Sasak traditional houses. In the area of PTSDS the pattern and layout of the building
and its structure is a customary provision that cannot be changed because it contains good intentions and goals.
Meanwhile, the use of land outside the PTSDS area, more diverse and dynamic but still associated with local
cultural order.
Land use within the area or PTSDS fence and outside the village gate has a difference. Inside the PTSDS
footprint is used for community social activities, while outside the fence is used for agricultural land.

Settlement Patterns PTSDS

According to the beliefs of the Sasak tribe, the higher the position of the village means the inhabitants in it have
high caste levels as well. PTSDS is one of the traditional villages that has the highest geographical position among
other traditional Sasak villages in Sub district of Bayan. PTSDS has a historical background as the oldest traditional
village in Bayan district with its inhabitants having the highest caste levels among other residents of the township.
Until now the institutional structure of tradition is still maintained as a form of local wisdom that is binding for all
residents of the village. Layout. The village of PTSDS which is maintained for generations is a great potential in the
development of the area as a cultural tourism area.
The typical settlement pattern of the Sasak tribe in the PTSDS region forms a chessboard pattern (grid) that is
limited by the fence around the village. The orientation of the PTSDS village layout facing west with its philosophy
is the direction of the Qibla praying that faces west. Similarly, the orientation of traditional houses that all face to the
west and east. The formation of the orientation is a legacy of tradition and culture that has become the custom of the
Sasak tribe in Senaru Village.
The pattern of traditional settlement layout in PTSDS as well as traditional architectural styles that exist is one
form of cultural heritage rich in the history, philosophy, art, and culture of the local community. Therefore, as one of

25 May 2024 [Link]

the customary villages that have a unique spatial settlement pattern that is full of cultural values, the area of PTSDS
needs to get special attention by still paying attention to the existence and balance of the traditional principles of the
standard, that is the spatial pattern that has been realized in space Traditional area.
In the village of PTSDS in it there are buildings such as custom homes, berugak and barns and agricultural land
outside the village gate is a unity of landscapes with typical architectural layout patterns of the Sasak tribe. The
absence of construction or addition of buildings (in the footprint) aims to not damage the pattern of layout of the
traditional architecture in addition to the binding customary law. The main components that form the PTSDS area
consist of custom house, berugak and granary. While other components that are supporters are guardrail fence, yard
and public and social facilities. From these various components form a unified landscape that is PTSDS with
uniqueness and distinctive characteristics that have the potential to be developed into a cultural tourism area.

FIGURE 1. Existing Site Plan of PTSDS Villages

080014-5
 In this PTSDS region the elements of the formation also have the same layout that is with the presence of
customary head house at the forefront of the village (on the east) and then another custom house with residents who
have lower caste levels to the west. The overall orientation of the building faces west and east. Thus the unified
landscape that has an identity that reflects the culture of the Sasak tribe is expressed in the layout of the village of
PTSDS with its components both within and outside the settlement.
The existence of PTSDS is characterized by the presence of a fence around its tread. The fence is made of plants,
bamboo or wood arranged in parallel with a height of ± 2 meters. The fence on PTSDS has the main function as a
territorial divider of traditional village area. Since the size of the village cannot increase or decrease, then plotting.
The fence cannot be changed. The hedgerows in the PTSDS area also serve for security and barriers to prevent
criminal acts such as livestock theft.

Energy
The energy that people use comes from renewable energy sources. They use oil and porous building designs for
lighting and for cooking using biomass derived from wood, branch, or twig. It is set and taught in their custom. The
rules of planting and harvesting trees are already regulated by custom. For cooking they harvest the dry branch of
the tree from within the PTSDS region bioregion.
Energy conservation is implemented in the construction of community houses such as:
x Orientation and location of buildings designed to make the building comfortable.
x Using a good passive air conditioning method and porous material
x Communities use methods that conserve and energy efficiency in building design. The use of energy at
home is minimized by conserving practices such as using natural lighting from the pore holes in the gedeg
wall (porous).

Building material

25 May 2024 [Link]

Building materials are taken, among others, from forest cover, fields and they must ask for permission first to
Tua loka, where the use of building materials are:
x Natural/recyclable
x Can be reused / reusable
x Comes from within bioregion

Customary rules have successfully conserved their environments and forest cover so that both building and
preservation techniques in Sasak - Senaru use environmentally friendly techniques. Development of materials used
and construction methods are naturally sourced from nearby areas and do not use a mixture of chemicals.
Wood construction can last up to 35 years and the durability of bamboo construction is more than 15 years without
preserved with chemicals. The use of construction materials such as wood and bamboo is in line with the
recommended use of environmentally friendly materials because wood and bamboo are renewable building
materials. Especially bamboo which includes fast growing plants (Environment Protection Agency, 2010).

Build system
The process of establishing a house is done on a month when on the farm (fields) there is no activity. Land is
forbidden to be dug to build a house and this is due to the density of the soil which will decrease its carrying
capacity if the soil is urugan/heap so that the possibility of the decline of the building.
Elements of building construction is made where the building materials are located and taken to the location is
already a component. Constructing of Sasak house - PTSDS uses pre-fabrication system. Before a house is
constructed. Parts and components of the house such as roof coverings, wall coverings, and floor coverings have
been prepared homeowners into parts that are ready to be installed. If wood is not available in the garden around the
village, it can be taken in the forest cover land with the permission of Tua Loka.

080014-6
 The system of implementation of constructing is mutual assistance between citizens (gotong royong). The Sasak
area development system - PTSDS is in line with the eco-friendly development initiatives developed today in the
framework of environmental protection.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 2010 suggested that the building materials being used are
processed in place and the building elements installed off-site. Elements brought to the site are already components
to minimize waste and do not pollute the location with noise and dust (EPA, 2010).
Results obtained from the questionnaires obtained.
TABLE 1. Environmentally friendly construction system
Origin of Place of
Construction element Material Method
Materials Manufacture
Roof
Roof covering Rumbia Field
Village Mutual cooperation (Gotong royong)
Forest cover
Roof frame Bamboo Field
Village Mutual cooperation
Forest cover
Roof structure Wood Field
Village Mutual cooperation
Forest cover
Colomn Wood Field
Village Mutual cooperation
Forest cover
Beam Wood Field
Village Mutual cooperation
Forest cover
Wall Bamboo Field
Village Mutual cooperation
Forest cover
Floor Soil Fields and
Village Mutual cooperation
Rice Fields
Foundation Umpak

25 May 2024 [Link]

River Village Mutual cooperation
mountain rock

TABLE 2. Value sustainability PTSDS communities from ecological aspects

No Ecological Aspects Scores Scores
1 Meaning of residence 53
2 The availability of food (production and distribution) 54
3 Infrastructure (buildings and transportation) 65
4 Patterns (consumption and solid waste management) 75
5 Water (source, quality and usage patterns) 61
6 Management (wastewater & water pollution) 64
7 Energy, (source and use) 74
Total 446

TABLE 3. Value sustainability PTSDS communities of the sociological aspect

No. Social Aspects Scores Scores
1 Openness, (trust and security; a common room) 57
2 Communication (flow of ideas and information) 50
3 Network (achievement & services) 50
4 social sustainability 57
5 Education 50
6 Medical services 54
7 sustainability economy; (Health of the local economy) 55
Total 373

080014-7
 TABLE 4. Value sustainibilitas communities PTSDS from spiritual
No. Social Aspects Scores Scores
1 Sustainibilitas culture 75
2 Arts and recreation 46
3 spiritual Sustainibilitas 51
4 Entanglement society 68
5 Resilience community 72
6 new Holographic; (Worldview / global) 67
7 Peace and global thinking 63
Total 421

CONCLUSION
Based on the results of the analysis and discussion above it can be concluded that the traditional settlements of
the Sasak community - PTSDS is in accordance with the ecovillage concept of the Global Ecovillage Network. This
is evident from the results of data analysis based on CSA that get a total value of 1240; With the values of
ecological, social, and spiritual aspects of each 446, 373, and 421. The magnitude of these values has meaning and
meaning that the Sasak community - PTSDS has shown excellent progress on the sustainability of its community

REFERENCE
1. Andersen KT, Journal of Building and Environment 42, 534-542 (2007).
2. Arifin HS, NHS Arifin, IGP Suryadarma. 2003. Integrating the value of local tradition and cuiture in ecological
landscape planning in Indonesia. Inside: Hayashi Y, Manuwoto S, Hartono S, editor. Susutainable Agricuiture
in Rular Indonesia. Ed. Number 1. Yogyakarta: Gajah Mada University Press.

25 May 2024 [Link]

3. Auliya T et al. Arsitektur E-Journal. 2 (2009).
4. Bastide A et al. Energy and Buildings 38, 1093-1103 (2006).
5. Capra F. 2003. What is an eco-village. available at:
http:[Link]/building/.html [4 June 2014]
6. Chunhai X., Journal Building Simulation,” Build. Simul. 1, 46-52 (2008).
7. Duangporn and Jitkhajornwanich N, Panin O, Chindavanig T. 2004. Thermal comfort and adaptation to living
for local people, Silpakom University Bangkok, Thailand.
8. Engin N et al, Building and Environment 42 (2), 960-969 (2007).
9. Frick H, Ardiyanto A, Darmawaan AMS. Ilmu Fisika Bangunan. Penerbit Kanisius (Yogyakarta, 2008).
10. Gaitani N et al., Building and Environment 42, 317-324 (2007).
11. Gilman R. 1991, Ecovillage definition. available at:
[Link]
12. Global Ecovillage Network. (GEN) 2007, Community Sustainibility Assessment,
[Link] [Link]/activities/[Link]
13. Hildur J. 2006, Global Ecovillage Network, Gaia Trust, available at :
[Link] book/[Link].
14. Hirano T et al. 2006, Journal Building and Environment 41.
15. Kim DK., Building and Environment 41(12), 1905-1912 (2006).
16. Livermore SR, Woods AW, Building and Environment 41 (10), 1339-1351 (2006).
17. Maciel AA. Et al, Journal Building and Simulation 42(10), 3762-3773 (2007).
18. Mahdavi A et al. Building Simulation 16, 111-117 (2008).
19. Rilatupa J. 2008. Jurnal Sains dan Teknologi EMAS 18.
20. Ryn S, Cowan S, Ecological Design (USA: Island Press, USA, 1998).
21. Sabrina R. et al. Jurnal Tata Kota dan Daerah. Vol 1. No 2 Juli 2010.
22. Subadyo, A. Tutut. 2003. Arsitektur Tradisional Lombok. Jurusan Arsitektur Universitas Merdeka Malang.
23. Sulistianto, MI. 2005. Perencanaan Lansekap Permukiman Tradisioanl Segenter Sebagai Kawasan Wisata
Budaya. IPB Bogor.
24. Smed J, Wall M, Energy and Buildings, 39, 273-278 (2007).
25. Sozen MS, Gedik GZ., Building and Environment 42(4), 1810-1816 (2007).

080014-8
26. Tenorio R, Building and Environment 42(2), 605-613 (2007).
27. Wardi LHS, Jurnal Media Bina Ilmiah 6(2) 2012.
28. White H, Masset. E., Journal Development and Change 34, 105-126 (2003).
29. Widyarti M. 2011. Kajian dan Rekonstruksi Konsep Eco-village dan Eco-house pada Permukiman Sasak -
Senaru Dalam berdasarkan Community Sustainibility Assessment. Disertasi. IPB Bogor.
30. Wong NH et al, Building and Environment 42(8), 2949-2970 (2007).
31. Wong NH, Lin S., Building and Environment 42(3), 1395-1405 (2007).

25 May 2024 [Link]

080014-9