Content uploaded by Usha Iyer-Raniga
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Usha Iyer-Raniga on Jan 25, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
Chapter 1
Bridging the Gap Between Industry
and Academia: The Case of Indonesia
Usha Iyer-Raniga and Tony Dalton
Abstract As a country, Indonesia is becoming increasingly urbanized and has a
large proportion of its population under the age of 25 years, at slightly over 100
million. Developing this fairly large proportion of its population from a human
capital perspective is essential for the future of the country. Currently there is a
40% gap between supply and demand; and is expected to grow to 70% by 2025.
Building an educational platform for effective learning and skills formation is
urgently needed. This entry presents the outcomes of a case study aimed at under-
standing the disconnects between academia, industry and government in the context
of Indonesia’s built environment programs. In particular, the architecture profession
and architectural education have been considered as one of several built environment
programs under pressure to change. Built environment suite of programs have various
disciplinary underpinnings: architecture, building, engineering, planning, quantity
surveying, project management and others such as interior design and transporta-
tion engineering. The case study focuses on the results of a workshop in Indonesia,
where various stakeholders responsible for city planning and building came together
to determine the current challenges and seek solutions. The entry delves into the
education of the architecture profession in Indonesia and presents the results of the
workshop with some recommendations for the future. The results show that the
various sectors and stakeholders are prepared to work collaboratively and support
joint ownership of meeting curricular outcomes.
Keywords Education ·Built environment ·Climate change ·Sustainability ·
Indonesia
U. Iyer-Raniga (B)
School of Property, Construction and Project Management, RMIT University, Melbourne,
Australia
e-mail: Usha.Iyer-Raniga@rmit.edu.au
UN One Planet Network Sustainable Buildings and Construction Programme, Paris, France
T. Da lt on
Centre for Urban Research, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia
e-mail: Tony.Dalton@rmit.edu.au
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021
U. Iyer-Raniga (ed.), Sustainability in the Built Environment in the 21st Century: Lessons
Learned from India and the Region, Environmental Science and Engineering,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030- 61891-9_1
1
2 U. Iyer-Raniga and T. Dalton
1.1 Background
The research presented in this paper is part of a broader research project examining
how environmental, economic and social perspectives for sustainable development
may be more systematically integrated into higher education institution built envi-
ronment professional education in the Asia Pacific region. The project, Built Envi-
ronment Curricula in the Asia–Pacific region: responding to climate change, aims
to present a framework and an argument for a systemic greening of the built envi-
ronment curriculum in higher education institutions in the Asia–Pacific. The project
was funded by ProSPER.Net (https://prospernet.ias.unu.edu/) under the umbrella of
the United Nations University, an alliance of leading universities in the Asia–Pacific
region committed to integrating sustainable development into postgraduate courses
and curricula. The network alliance was founded in June 2008 with 46 members
(as of late-2018) mostly in the Asia–Pacific, committed to education and research
focusing on sustainable futures (ProSPER.Net 2018).
The principal goal of Built Environment Curricula in the Asia–Pacific region:
responding to climate change is to propose ways for increasing the capacity of future
built environment professionals to design and build low carbon cities in the Asia–
Pacific. Some work has already been undertaken in some higher educational institu-
tions, but a lot of this work is very fragmented. The project does not distinguish
between the various disciplines comprising the built environment as the related
disciplines need to work together to ensure quality outcomes for the built envi-
ronment. The countries and professions chosen for Built Environment Curricula in
the Asia–Pacific region: responding to climate change, are Indonesia (Architects),
China (Architects), Thailand (Architects and Engineers), Sri Lanka (Engineers) and
Philippines (Planners).
While the goals of the overarching project are many, the ones specifically related to
this paper are to develop a method for analyzing the institutional development of built
environment professions and their relationship to higher education in the context of
new expectations that these professions contribute more to climate change, mitigation
and adaptation. Supporting this aim also requires improved capacity building of
the academic staff that are involved in teaching in these universities and exploring
pedagogies that support learning outcomes for students.
As part of this project, institutional analysis of built environment professions
in five countries, including Indonesia was undertaken. The case study method was
used to understand institutional disconnects between industry and academia; using
this method enables better in-context and cultural understanding to be gained in
the research. The findings arising from the Indonesia case study were then tested
through a workshop. Hence, this paper focuses only on testing the findings of the
research for Indonesia, undertaken through a workshop comprising industry, govern-
ment and academic participants; limiting the scope to the final step of the Indone-
sian case study. Other papers have reported on the research outcomes leading to
this point: architectural educational program in Indonesia (Iyer-Raniga and Dalton
1 Bridging the Gap Between Industry and Academia … 3
2017a) and interviews with selected academics and industry professionals to under-
stand the architectural programs and their structure (Iyer-Raniga and Dalton 2017b)
and the gaps in the architecture educational program. A report for Built Environment
Curricula in the Asia–Pacific region: responding to climate change has also been
prepared (Dalton and Iyer-Raniga 2018).
The workshop in Indonesia brought together forty built environment and higher
education professionals from universities, industry associations, professional asso-
ciations and government agencies with responsibility for city planning, building and
economic development that were committed to the development of low carbon cities.
This chapter commences with an overview of the education system in Indonesia,
followed by how architecture programs are currently situated, particularly, for dealing
with real-world associated built environment problems. This is followed by a descrip-
tion and outcomes of the workshop in Jakarta. These sections are followed by the
discussions and conclusions.
1.2 Education in Indonesia
Before delving into the education system in Indonesia, it is important to first consider
the context of the country. As a country, Indonesia is rich in natural resources,
minerals, oils and has fertile agricultural lands; yet also plagued by natural disas-
ters. The country is an archipelago stretching between the Indian and Pacific oceans
consisting of about 17,500 islands, of which around 6000 are inhabited. It is the third
largest country in Asia and has a population of nearly 264 million (2017 figures)
(World Bank Group 2018) spread over 34 provinces comprising of 502 regencies,
6543 districts and over 75,000 villages. In terms of economy, it is the 16th largest
in the world and the largest economy in ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian
Nations) (World Bank Group 2018). It is the world’s most populous Islamic nation
(worldatlas 2018).
The country is becoming increasingly urbanized and has a large proportion of
its population under the age of 25 years, at slightly over 100 million (OECD/Asian
Development Bank 2015). Developing this fairly large proportion of its population
from a human capital perspective is essential for the future of the country. Currently
there is a 40% gap between supply and demand; and is expected to grow to 70% by
2025 (Thomases 2016). Building an educational platform for effective learning and
skills formation is urgently needed.
The rapidly urbanizing context of Indonesia creates tensions with traditional
educational programs and pathways responding to the current and future demands
of a built environment that needs to incorporate new knowledge and professional
practices mindful of environmental, social and economic impacts of the built envi-
ronment. Built environment professionals need skills in appropriate design and plan-
ning responses for mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions and ensuring low energy
and water use during construction and operation. In addition, materials, products
and services need to systemically ensure low overall carbon inputs and outputs; and
4 U. Iyer-Raniga and T. Dalton
consider the tensions between mitigation and adaptation responses as a result of a
changing climate. To make matters more complicated, the country has been threat-
ened by a series of natural disasters drawing urgent attention to the quality of current
and future built environment.
The educational system in Indonesia is the third largest in Asia, after China and
India. It is the fourth largest in the world, if the US is included to the list (OECD
and ADB 2015, p. 69). The technical and vocational education and training centers
across Indonesia are fragmented. They need to improve coordination and employer
involvement, and they need to be more industry driven. In terms of higher educa-
tion, about a third of the relevant aged Indonesian youth are enrolled (OECD and
Asian Development Bank 2015). While the public universities fare okay, many of
the private universities do not fare well. The facilities are poor, academic staff are not
qualified and their remuneration rates are not on par with market expectations either.
The country has 92 public and 3078 private institutions, and 52 Islamic institutions
(OECD and Asian Development Bank 2015, p. 185). The large number of unaccred-
ited higher education institutions of over 2500 in number have no clear outcomes
for student learning and graduate attributes, quality of educational qualifications; all
impacting on job prospects (OECD and Asian Development Bank 2015).
The main issue identified in the report by OECD and Asian Development Bank
(2015) was that the graduate supply is not in sync with the emerging labor market
requirements. Particularly with the built environment sector only 16% of graduates
studied engineering, manufacturing and construction while growth in construction
in the period from 2001–13 increased by 52% (OCED and Asian Development Bank
2015, p. 64). Employers complained that graduates lacked relevant language and
skills and this siloed approach is largely due to a disconnect between institutional
governance and industry. A key finding of the report was that outside the main island,
Java, there is very little development in the educational institutions particularly in
the far-flung regions of the country. Research budget for the country is one of the
lowest amongst ASEAN countries, at less than 1% of the GDP in 2012 (OECD
and Asian Development Bank 2015, p. 198). That said, the budget has increased by
more than 3 times from the period 2006–12. The aim of the government is to reach
1% of GDP by 2025. As a result of expenditure on research and development in
Indonesia being confined to the public sector, domestic Indonesian companies have
not attracted research and development due to its low skills base.
Indonesian universities do not do well in international rankings (OECD and Asian
Development Bank 2015; Thomases 2016). Traditional didactic teaching is the main
form of educational delivery and underpins the teaching and learning model of educa-
tion in the country. To support critical thinking and higher cognitive skills, the current
approaches to teaching and learning need to change. The current capacities of higher
education teachers need to be harnessed and nurtured to support such change. The
government needs to support this by undertaking a major programme of diversifying
tertiary education and improving the quality and selectivity of research aligned with
the country’s national priorities. The government also needs to expand the accredita-
tion capacity of the BAN-PT (Badan Akreditasi Nasional Perguruan Tinggi, National
1 Bridging the Gap Between Industry and Academia … 5
Board for Accreditation of Higher Education) set up in 2008, and to ensure that inde-
pendent professional accreditation boards (LAM-PT) are also included as part of this
process (OECD and Asian Development Bank 2015). LAMs have been planned for
health, engineering and agriculture.
Accreditations of various programs usually last for 5 years. Among other recom-
mendations by the report are building capacities through higher degrees such as
doctorates catering to both industrial and professional doctorates, development of
institutional capacity building and increase in the proportion of external experts and
professionals in university board appointments. Particularly for polytechnics, prac-
tical industry experience needs to become a pre-requisite criterion for appointment
in polytechnic institutions.
Setting up the National Qualifications Frameworks in Indonesia by the govern-
ment is a fairly new undertaking but one that the country urgently needs. Under the
Higher Education Law in Indonesia, there are flexible pathways to achieve various
qualifications. For degrees, the current system provides bachelors (S1), masters (S2)
and doctoral (S3: PhDs) degrees (academic or applied) and professional degrees (e.g.
architecture). The length of study for a bachelor’s degree is four years, with a further
two years for a master’s degree. PhD degree is three years on top of a Masters’ degree.
For vocational qualifications, programs provide diplomas after one to four years of
study (D1–D4).
The next section examines how built environment programs, in particular archi-
tecture programs have responded to current challenges and how these are situated in
the educational context of Indonesia.
1.3 Architecture Programs and Indonesia
As already noted, environmental disasters have plagued Indonesia since the last
millennium. Indonesia has had its fair share of natural disasters such as earthquakes,
tsunamis, volcanic eruptions, typhoons and other human related environmental chal-
lenges such as floods and landslides as a result of environmental degradation. These
are expected to continue to affect lives currently and in the future.
At the time of writing this paper a recent natural disaster hit the country on Oct. 1
2018. Palu and Donggala in Indonesia was hit by a powerful earthquake and tsunami
with deaths (as of Oct. 3) at over 800 and over 50,000 people displaced by the
disaster (Associated Press 2018). Just a few months earlier, multiple earthquakes
also hit Indonesia, the most recent one hit Lombok on July 29, 2018. Over 10,000
homes were destroyed in this earthquake. The Indonesian government announced
assistance for supporting houses damaged by the earthquake to rebuild their own
homes without the support of a builder or a building contractor. The ministry of
Public Works and Housing were training residents to build their own homes (Nugroho
2018). The government has agreed to provide funding to procure building materials
such as cement, wood, etc. The training for building houses takes 1–2 days and
male and female residents are expected to contribute to house building. Thus, a
6 U. Iyer-Raniga and T. Dalton
strong educational platform is required to ensure appropriate skills for building and
rebuilding in the country.
UNESCO, being the specialized agency for education is leading and coordinating
the Education 2030 agenda. Sustainable Development Goal 4 aims to “ensure inclu-
sive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities
for all” by 2030 (UNESCO 2018). The International Union of Architects (UIA) is
the only global organization representing the world’s architects. It was founded in
Lausanne, Switzerland in 1948. UIA is representing approximately 3.2 million archi-
tects globally. The aim of the UIA is to advance policies and programs that improve
communities through design (UIA 2018).
With the UN SDGs coming into effect in 2016, the role of architects has become
more important than ever. With impacts of climate change and population shifts
becoming more and more urban, the challenges to the architecture professionals and
other professions related to the built environment are enormous. Planning, construc-
tion, development, management and improvement of cities weave a complex web
of linking the physical built environment with socio economic opportunities and
supporting better quality of life. The UIA aims to support architects through a respon-
sive and responsible roadmap supporting prescriptive implementation of the UN
SDGs (UIA 2018).
Broadly, within the literature, there is not much by way of knowledge exchanges
between academia and industry. This is not restricted to the construction industry
alone and can be seen in other professions, for instance, health (Lomas 2007).
However, it is possible to bring academia, industry and government together. In
the industry research schools set up in Sweden, it has been shown that industrial
doctoral students can act as innovator and bridge connectors (Dahlgren and Owe
2007). However, the process has not been particularly smooth for all the students. A
similar study over a decade ago in the UK also showed a similar degree of success
(Williams 2004,2005; Broadfoot and Philippa 2003), as has been the case with the
Cooperative Research Centres (CRCs) in Australia.
With reference to construction in particular, Moncaster et al. (2010) indicate there
is very little empirical evidence to show the impact of research on construction prac-
titioners and their practices and vice versa. But, they say that industry and academia
need to work together and ensure efficient and effective knowledge production. They
also show that there is a strong traditional approach of knowledge access through
academic journals and attendance at academic conferences, and given our current
challenges are not effective for innovation, change and co-production of knowledge.
They suggest that industry and academia should work together, particularly in the
context of developing research knowledge. They also suggest that programs should
be developed, that directly benefit growth and integration of not just knowledge
networks but also communities of practice.
Using the case of Malaysia, Tan and Sarimin (2011) discuss the significance of
universities in contributing to a knowledge-based economy in a developing country
context. To develop and support a fully functioning knowledge city, a coordinated
effort from public and private sectors, and academia is needed not just for the phys-
ical planning but also for development of a functioning city from social, economic,
1 Bridging the Gap Between Industry and Academia … 7
environment and institutional perspectives into the future. Another example in Thai-
land (Chookittikul et al. 2011) discusses the impact of gaps between education and
industry in the context of IT education. They suggest the interests of both education
and industry may be possible if agile technologies are used. In a study of India, it was
found that industry-academia collaboration was particularly weak, considering the
growth of the building and construction sector and the rising interest and pressures on
green building (Arif et al. 2010). There is a lack of industry-academic collaboration
in India and young graduates are not ‘armed’ with knowledge to deal with green
building challenges. Curricula has not changed to meet with the changing industry
expectations and research agenda does not really work towards bridging the existing
gaps.
Franz’s (2008) paper considers practice, pedagogy and partnership central to the
issue of employability and continuing relevance of professional education. Teaching,
learning, research and application are integrally interconnected at both undergrad-
uate and postgraduate levels. Work integrated learning models for built environment
students represent an untapped opportunity that needs to be fully explored for the
benefit of students and the profession.
Chau et al.’s (2017) paper discuss the misalignment between university-industry
in the UK. They say that the strategic visions of the university and industry are not
aligned, and coordination within universities is essential. Universities need to rethink
their role in knowledge transfer and think clearly about the role of universities in the
twenty-first century. Another study states that for university-industry collaboration
to be successful, individual rather than institutional levels of motivation are required
(Rajalo and Vadi 2017).
An example of academic-industry collaboration can be seen by interior design
students where recycled materials were used to design and build light fixtures for
a company’s product line using social media. While the experience was beneficial
for the students across several pedagogic, teaching and learning fronts; the primary
limitation of the industry-academic collaboration was the duration of the timelines
for the course (Asojo 2013).
Historically, the link between environmental or sustainable design and archi-
tectural education in Indonesia is quite weak. As indicated by Tanuwidjaja and
Leonardo (2016), Indonesia has a long way to go in terms of integrating environ-
mental challenges in the architectural education system. The socio-economic context
underpinning sustainability solutions also needs to be included in this understanding.
Iyer-Raniga and Dalton (2017a) discussed and mapped the importance of aligning
educational curricula with other institutional agencies to drive, complement and
support changes for low carbon futures in Indonesia, particularly driven by the peak
architecture professional body, the Indonesian Architects Association (Ikatan Arsitek
Indonesia, IAI). This research focused on understanding how the architecture educa-
tion in Indonesia evolved. Following this was an exploration, through semi-structured
interviews of the educational concerns with the current approaches as to how archi-
tecture programs are taught, the quality of graduates, engagement with other built
environment disciplines, the structure of the building code, lack of self-regulation of
8 U. Iyer-Raniga and T. Dalton
the profession and quality of the professionals themselves, reported in Iyer-Raniga
and Dalton (2017b).
Thus, the two phases of the research provide the background to the next part of
the research continuum, the workshop. The next section focuses on the workshop as
the final step in the case study research on the architecture profession in Indonesia.
The workshop was designed to seek ideas from participants on how to systematically
integrate environmentally sustainable development thinking into a university’s built
environment professional education in the rapidly urbanizing context of Indonesia.
1.4 The Workshop
The workshop was designed to seek ideas from participants on how to systematically
integrate environmentally sustainable development thinking into a university’s built
environment professional education in the rapidly urbanizing Asia–Pacific region,
with a focus on Indonesia. The authors engaged an Indonesian project manager on
the ground to support the organization of the workshop, identify the right participants
and organize formal invitations in Bahasa and follow up with various government
and industry participants.
Participants in the workshop were drawn from:
•Indonesian government agencies with built environment, environment and educa-
tion responsibilities.
•Professional and industry associations including the Indonesian Institute of Archi-
tects, Indonesian Association of Schools of Architecture and the Indonesian Green
Building Council.
•Academics from architecture and engineering departments in Indonesian univer-
sities.
•ProSPER.Net member universities undertaking case studies on built environment
professions. These universities were from China, Sri Lanka, Philippines, Thailand
and Indonesia.
•International agencies including the International Finance Corporation.
The work undertaken during the earlier phases of the project examining the nature
of built environment professional education stakeholders, attendant opportunities
and constraints assisted with a really good understanding of the background of the
project with respect to the role of built environment professionals and identification
of possible gaps with industry. This led to an understanding of what possible actions
need to be taken to ensure currency of built environment professional education.
It was also possible to establish a set of priorities for possible actions that could
maintain support for developing a collaborative change program.
While the workshop was held in Indonesia and most of its participants were from
Indonesia, the workshop also had a regional orientation informed by the participa-
tion of representatives of the ProSPER.Net universities from some of the countries
involved in the project.
1 Bridging the Gap Between Industry and Academia … 9
1.4.1 Workshop Design
Arising from the background work undertaken, three main observations guided the
current context for built environment professions in the Asia–Pacific region and
provided a starting point for the workshop.
•A priority policy objective for all governments in the rapidly urbanizing Asia–
Pacific region is to meet global commitments to mitigate and adapt to climate
change by decarbonizing the built environment, making it more energy and water
efficient, and more resilient for changes due to the climate.
•Professionals who design, procure, finance, renew and maintain the built environ-
ment are being challenged to incorporate new knowledge and practices into the
way they produce less carbon and water sensitive built environments.
•Universities that educate professionals, such as architects, engineers, project
managers, and planners, are being challenged to renew their curriculum so that
graduates can produce less carbon and water intensive built environments.
The workshop was facilitated by the project leader and the lead author of this
paper. Four short presentations were used to set the context for the workshop and
support the workshop outcomes. These presentations focused on four main areas
to set the scene for the workshop. These were, reshaping higher education in the
region, the work undertaken by the authors in understanding the academic-industry
context explored through the background to the current project, setting the context,
the assumptions and primary arguments underpinning the research, and knowledge
sharing from other ProSPER.Net case study countries on the built environment. With
respect to the knowledge sharing, architects and architecture education in China, and
engineers and engineering education in Sri Lanka were considered.
Reshaping higher education: Responses to twenty-first century challenges and
demands, was presented by a peer undertaking research on quality assurance in
universities for the ASEAN region. SHARE is the European Union Support to
Higher Education in the ASEAN Region, and is a four-year EU and ASEAN initia-
tive. SHARE is supported by a consortium of the British Council (leader), Campus
France, DAAD, EP-Nuffic, ENQA, and EUA. SHARE aims to support ASEAN
in harmonizing regional higher education by sharing European expertise (Neider-
meyer and Pohlenz 2016). It does this through strengthening regional cooperation,
enhancing the quality, competitiveness, and internationalization of ASEAN higher
education for institutions and students, and thereby contributing to a closer ASEAN
Community in 2015 and beyond.
The workshop began with the higher education context and the fluid nature of
quality assurance in the Asia–Pacific region. The ASEAN region in particular is char-
acterized by a rising number of programs and universities to respond to the education
needs of large numbers of young population. The first presentation explored the possi-
bilities for integrating the science of climate change and sustainability knowledge
into teaching and learning in the educational institutions. The key question under-
pinning the presentation was the future of higher education in the region in relation
10 U. Iyer-Raniga and T. Dalton
to competencies, balanced with technical knowledge, co-production in teaching and
learning, study programs, thinking and learning, and development of curricula in a
way that is qualifying students to understand and practice in a sustainable paradigm.
Broader issues and challenges of the built environment professions and profes-
sional education in the Asia-Pacific Region was then presented with a specific focus
on Indonesia, followed by the state of the profession and education in Sri Lanka and
China. The key themes guiding the development of each of these presentations were:
•Built environment regulation: the development and implementation of regulations
and their systems of administration
•The profession: the development of the association and engagement with urban
sustainability issues
•Curriculum governance: arrangements used for the revising curriculum in higher
education (HE) built environment professional programs
•ESD (Environmentally Sustainable Development) in the curriculum: sustainability
integration in case study undergraduate and post-graduate professional programs
•Expectations of the profession: evidence from stakeholder debate about challenges
in the context of climate change.
For the general context of the Asia–Pacific region, and focus on the architecture
profession in Indonesia, the project co-lead presented to the workshop participants.
The presenters for the Sri Lanka and China case studies were the invited ProSPER.Net
participants from the relevant universities in these countries. The Sri Lanka study
focused on the engineering profession and the China study focused on the architecture
profession.
These presentations were followed by three facilitated sessions of round table
discussions. Each table was briefed before-hand on their role by the workshop facil-
itator to maximize interaction and exchange of ideas in each group. As govern-
ment organization representatives were included in the workshop, representatives of
two government organizations; the Ministry of Environment and Forestry and the
Ministry of Public Works and Housing formally ‘opened’ the workshop.
Five discussion groups were formed out of the 40 participants with approxi-
mately 8 participants in each group. Care was taken to ensure there was a balance of
industry, government and academic stakeholders in each group. Group membership
was adjusted across the three rounds of discussion so that group-think was avoided
and interactions between the participants was maximized.
The three main themes of the workshop (as outlined in the assumptions) were
discussed in the groups over three main sessions, each lasting about 1.5 hours in a
logical progression. Prior to each round, the facilitator posed questions to the work-
shop participants to be further discussed in each group, with 3-minute presentations
following from each group; shared with all the participants of the workshop.
For the first round (Round 1) of discussions, the following questions were posed:
•Who are the stakeholders that need to be considered for built environment higher
education?
•What are the opportunities?
1 Bridging the Gap Between Industry and Academia … 11
•What are the constraints?
Participants moved to the next round (Round 2) of discussions, while table facili-
tators remained the same. Care was maintained to ensure that the diversity of partic-
ipants was maintained in this round. For the second round of table discussions the
following questions were posed:
•What bridges can be connected between the stakeholders?
•What actions can be taken?
•What is realistic?
For the final round (Round 3), participants were requested to also undertake
some personal reflections before undertaking discussions at their table. The guiding
question for this last activity was:
•What are the possibilities for action?
•Participants had to come up with up to three action items, which they then
discussed within their groups to be presented to the wider workshop.
1.4.2 Workshop Outcomes
As a result of the desktop research, anticipated outcomes planned were:
•Commitment for built environment curriculum change that extends beyond current
bottom-up approaches to a system wide change.
•Commitment from an agency or agencies for leading initiatives promoting system
wide change.
•A modest list of feasible initiatives with the potential to inform and develop system
wide change in built environment professional education.
•Review of the methodology being used in the ProSPER.Net project to research
and analyze built environment professional education.
A summary of the workshop outcomes of the table discussions in each round
are presented here. For Round 1, where participants had to come up with a list of
stakeholders, with opportunities and constraints, almost all the groups identified a
similar set of stakeholders. Not surprisingly, the stakeholders identified were similar
to the stakeholders present at the workshop. Other stakeholders in particular that
participant’s felt needed to be included were a range of building industry devel-
opers, owners, manufacturers in the supply chain, and specific types of consultant
stakeholders. Some of these are provided below:
•Building owners and the community
•Ministry of Energy, Ministry of Higher Education and Ministry of Manpower
•Professional bodies such as IAP (Institute of Planners), IABHI (Institute of Green
Building Professionals) and APTARI (Building Science teachers in universities)
12 U. Iyer-Raniga and T. Dalton
Table 1.1 Opportunities and constraints identified
Opportunities Constraints
Better access to global knowledge Lack of alignment of codes and regulation
Development of a locally customized curricula Outdated standards
Cooperation with other stakeholders and
professionals in developing curricula
Lack of specialists
Collaboration with local and international
universities
Lack of harmonization of professional
standards and qualifications
Dissemination of case studies and best practice Resistance of curricular change from
universities
Involvement of practicing professionals to create
interest and awareness among students
Lack of professional lecturers
Lack of elective courses
Local wisdom not incorporated
Fragmented decision making
Fragmentation/siloed approach to building
design and construction
•Non-government organisations (NGOs) and development institutions such as
BISA (Association of Building Science educators in Indonesia), LPJK (Profes-
sional Regulatory Authority), WALHI (Environmental organizations)
•Supply chain manufacturing industry
•Experts: built environment experts and related such as environmental experts
•Consultant/contractor organizations such as INKINDO (consultant compa-
nies), GAPENSI (Contracting companies) and GAPENRI (Energy performance
contracting Companies).
The Table 1.1 presents the opportunities and constraints identified by the
participants.
In the second round, where connections with stakeholders were sought, there were
some diversity of outcomes and this is presented in Table 1.2. Overall seventeen
different ideas were presented by the participants.
The final round (Round 3) on prioritizing actions were surprisingly quite consis-
tent amongst the groups and a list of these has been provided in Table 1.3. A total of
eight priorities were narrowed down by the five groups.
1.4.3 Workshop Evaluation
An evaluation form was provided to the participants to seek feedback on all stages
of the workshop. All the speakers were considered to be good and the participants
felt overall that they got value for the time spent at the workshop. The participants
supported the workshop outcomes. Improvements for workshop included; ‘excellent
1 Bridging the Gap Between Industry and Academia … 13
Table 1.2 List of realistic actions to be taken to bridge the gap between academia and industry
1. Clearly defined learning outcomes for specific courses and programs
2. Strengthening licensing procedures
3. Providing incentives for uptake of green buildings where possible
4. Balance between theory and practice in university education
5. Developing quality through ESD competencies and curricular development
6. Creating and maintaining knowledge materials from specific industries
7. Forming partnerships with industry on research projects
8. Creating a repository of knowledge materials on green buildings (to be shared within, and
between universities nationally and globally)
9. Encouraging and supporting interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary thinking and practice in
the university programs
10. Capacity building for professional development/Online training for continuing education
11. Building research capacities in universities
12. Capacity building for academics, government officers with respect to standards and
certifications
13. Capacity building for the construction work force
14. Setting up campaigns where appropriate to bring awareness and support for green buildings
15. Knowledge sharing through benchmarking/demonstration/pilot projects and technology
transfer
16. Aligning construction companies and their work force, government agencies at national and
regional levels (and also local levels), NGOs, academe, and goods and services industries
17. Investment in design and performance evaluation, with learning by doing and demonstration
activities
Table 1.3 List of priorities
identified by the workshop
participants
1. Need to identify funding agencies/resources
2. Undertake a mapping exercise to determine gaps to
commence with capacity building
3. Align with and prepare a clear roadmap including all the
relevant stakeholders
4. Enforce regulation
5. Capacity building/continuing education for all stakeholders
6. Support the development of private projects for
benchmarking/showcasing/awareness
7. Development of a knowledge platform
8. Industry and government engagement in curriculum
development with incentives where appropriate
14 U. Iyer-Raniga and T. Dalton
job’, ‘keep up the good work’, ‘keep contact and share knowledge, information’, and
‘include life [sic] streaming and audience from various universities network, e.g. UN
Sustainable Development and Solutions Network Indonesia (26 universities)’.
1.5 Discussions
As indicated, a large proportion of Indonesia’s higher education institutions are unac-
credited and there is an urgent need to address low quality providers, according to
a recent report by OCED/Asian Development Bank. Capacity in higher education
institutions and institutes of technology need to be strengthened by taking a focused
approach to internationalization of research (OECD and Asian Development Bank
2015).
Lifelong learning requires a coordination and collaborative process of long term
thinking and far reaching changes to be put into implementation. Formal and non-
formal education system and workplace and other social organizations need to be
designed, organized and used as learning opportunities. This is not easy to achieve;
there are natural tensions between models of lifelong learning and higher educa-
tional institutions that operate on a narrow economic perspective. Currently, there
is fragmentation in the provision of higher education and there is also a disconnect
between demand and supply touted by key documents and reports by multilateral
agencies such as the Asian Development Bank and the World Bank (OECD and ADB
2015, p. 242–243). While the formal education system is critical, the non-formal and
the vocational system of education are important particularly with respect to the
development of skills and training for the built environment.
Within this background the research was undertaken with the aim of exploring how
best to integrate sustainability in built environment higher education programs, with a
particular focus on Indonesia. It was anticipated that there would be a common focus
on building a commitment for built environment curriculum change that extends
beyond current bottom-up approaches in individual universities or programs to a
system wide change. From this perspective, there was alignment amongst the work-
shop participants to focus on working together with various stakeholders, beyond
universities, with government agencies and industry to build a programme of change
together.
In addition, it was also acknowledged that commitment from agencies are
required, not just the universities. To this end, the International Finance Corporation
(IFC) has undertaken a commitment to re-engage with BISA (Indonesia Building
Sustainability Alliance) to take the project forward.
Engaging with government departments; in particular, the Ministry of Housing
and Public Works and the Ministry of Environment and Forestry supported the idea
of bringing government, industry and universities together. Further discussions with
other government departments—the Ministry of Higher Education and the Ministry
of Energy are planned in the near future.
1 Bridging the Gap Between Industry and Academia … 15
Overall, the discussions amongst the workshop participants presented a priority for
capacity building, developing knowledge sharing platforms and aligning government
and industry with academia in curriculum development.
1.6 Conclusions
The paper has attempted to understand the fragmentation between academia, industry
and government with respect to the nature of built environment programs in
Indonesia, focusing particularly on architecture. The current disconnects between
the various sectors that comprise the way education in Indonesia, particularly built
environment education needs to be developed and implemented for meeting current
and future challenges of climate change and sustainability needs to be carefully
considered. It was therefore imperative to seek input from various actors to share
ownership of curricular outcomes.
To make the curriculum renewal meaningful, a workshop was proposed to under-
stand how industry and government agencies may be able to support the develop-
ment of curriculum renewal. While certain competencies need to be met, it was
also critical that potential built environment practitioners are able to ground their
theoretical understanding with practical applications where possible. The workshop
undertaken with academic, industry and government stakeholders support the foun-
dation for institutional engagement for sustainability in higher education. The work-
shop confirms engagement and alignment with a range of diverse but related stake-
holders to commit to sustainability and climate change thinking and practice in built
environment higher education programs.
This research supports previous studies demonstrating the gaps between pressures
to meet current built environment challenges and the status of built environment
education currently. Urgent attention is needed to focus on curricular engagement;
not from a traditional perspective, but one that is cognizant of stakeholders’ needs
now and in the future. A long-term approach is needed to set the course for planning
now before it is too late.
References
Asojo AO (2013) Connecting academia with industry: pedagogical experiences from a collabora-
tive design project. In: Asia Pacific international conference on environment-behaviour studies,
University of Westminster, London, UK. Elsevier, London, UK, 4–6 September 2013, pp 304–313.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.11.032
Arif M, Egbu C, Alshawi M, Srinivas S, Tariq M (2010) Promoting green construction in India
through industry-academia collaboration. J Prof Issues Eng Educ Pract 136:128–131. https://doi.
org/10.1061/(ASCE)EI.1943-5541.0000019
16 U. Iyer-Raniga and T. Dalton
Associated Press (2018) The latest: Trump says US helping after devastating tsunami. The latest
on a powerful earthquake and tsunami that hit part of central Indonesia. The Washington Post.
Retrieved from: https://apnews.com/3a2cd222f3b84a0abf32b2b3608be13f
Broadfoot GH, Philippa J (2003) Academia and industry meet: some experiences of formal
methods in practice. In: Proceedings of the tenth Asia-Pacific software engineering confer-
ence (APSEC’03). IEEE Computer Society Press, Chiang Mai, Thailand. https://doi.org/10.1109/
APSEC.2003.1254357
Chau VS, Gilman M, Serbanica C (2017) Aligning university–industry interactions: the role of
boundary spanning in intellectual capital transfer. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 123:199–209.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.03.013
Chookittikul W, Kourik JL, Maher PE 2011. Reducing the gap between academia and industry:
the case for agile methods in Thailand. In 2011 eighth international conference on information
technology: new generations. IEEE Computer Society, Las Vegas, USA, pp 239–244. https://doi.
org/10.1109/ITNG.2011.49
Dahlgren LW, Lars O (2007). Industrial doctoral students as brokers between industry and academia.
Ind Higher Educ 195–210. https://doi.org/10.5367/000000007781236871
Dalton T, Iyer-Raniga U (2018) Built environment curricula in the Asia-Pacific region: responding
to climate change. RMIT University, Melbourne. Retrieved from: https://prospernet.ias.unu.edu/
wp-content/uploads/2018/02/ProSPER.Net-Project-Final-for-distribution-Built-Environment-
Curricula-in-the-Asia-Pacific-Region.pdf
Franz MJ (2008) A pedagogical model of higher education/industry engagement for enhancing
employability and professional practice. In: Proceedings: work integrated learning (WIL): trans-
forming futures, practice...pedagogy…partnerships. Sydney,Australia. https://eprints.qut.edu.au/
15541/
Iyer-Raniga U, Dalton TB (2017a) Challenges in aligning the architecture profession in indonesia
for climate change and sustainability. Procedia Eng 180:1733–1743. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
proeng.2017.04.336
Iyer-Raniga U, Dalton TB (2017b) A holistic view for integrating sustainability education for the
built environment professions in Indonesia. In: Filho WL et al (eds) Handbook of theory and
practice of sustainable development in higher education, world sustainability series. Springer
Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47868-5
Lomas J (2007). The in-between world of knowledge brokering. In: The BMJ. London, UK. https://
doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39038.593380.AE
Moncaster A, Hinds D, Cruickshank H, Guthrie PM, Crishna N, Beckmann K, Jowitt PW (2010)
Knowledge exchange between academic and industry. Eng Sustain 163:167–174. https://doi.org/
10.1680/ensu.2010.163.3.167
Niedermeier F, Pohlenz P (2016) State of play and development needs: higher education quality
assurance in the ASEAN region. DAAD, Jakarta. Retreived from: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/304062074_State_of_Play_and_Development_Needs_Higher_Education_Qua
lity_Assurance_in_the_ASEAN_Region
Nugroho SP, BNPB (Indonesia National Disaster Management Body) (2018) Rehabilition of houses
post Lombok earthquake begins. Retreived from: https://reliefweb.int/report/indonesia/rehabilit
ation-houses-post-lombok-earthquake-begins
OECD/Asian Development Bank (2015) Education in Indonesia: rising to the challenge. OECD
Publishing, Paris. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264230750-en.
ProSPER.Net (2018) ProSPER.Net promotion of sustainability in postgraduate education and
research. Retrieved from: https://prospernet.ias.unu.edu/about-prosper-net-page/what-is-prospe
r-net
Rajalo S, Vadi M (2017) University-industry innovation collaboration: reconceptualization.
Technovation 62:42–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2017.04.003
Tan Y, Sarimin M (2011) The role of universities in building prosperous knowledge cities: the
Malaysian experience. Built Environ 37:260–280. https://doi.org/10.2148/benv.37.3.260
1 Bridging the Gap Between Industry and Academia … 17
Tanuwidjaja G, Leonardo L (2016) Sustainable architectural design in Indonesia: responding the
current environmental challenges. Petra Christian University, Indonesia. https://doi.org/10.21776/
ub.ruas.2011.009.02.5
Thomases J (2016) Indonesia’s education gap. Edited by Asia Unbound. Council on Foreign
Relations. Retrieved from: https://www.cfr.org/blog/indonesias-education-gap
UIA (2018) International union of architects. Retrieved from: https://www.uia-architectes.org/web
Api/en/
UNESCO (2018) Leading education 2030. Retrieved from: https://en.unesco.org/education2030-
sdg4
Williams, A (2004) Industry engagement in UK built environment higher education courses. In:
20th Annual ARCOM conference. Association of Researchers in Construction Management,
Edinburgh, Scotland, pp 541–549. https://doi.org/10.11120/jebe.2008.03020033
Williams A (2005) Industry engagement in built environment. CEBE Trans 2(1):1–5. https://doi.
org/10.11120/tran.2005.02010001
worldatlas (2018) Countries with the largest muslim populations. Retrieved from: https://www.wor
ldatlas.com/articles/countries-with-the-largest-muslim-populations.html
World Bank Group (2018) World DataBank: world development indicators, Indonesia. Available
at: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.TOTL?end=2017&locations=ID&start=1960&
view=chart
