The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/1759-5908.htm

Modular
Development of modular school school design
design as a permanent solution for
post-disaster reconstruction
in Indonesia
Yandi Andri Yatmo, Paramita Atmodiwirjo, Received 8 October 2019
Revised 5 May 2020
Diandra Pandu Saginatari and Mochammad Mirza Yusuf Harahap 5 July 2020
12 July 2020
Department of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Indonesia, Accepted 13 July 2020
Depok, Indonesia

Abstract
Purpose – This paper describes the development and implementation of a modular school building design
prototype to support “build back better” after the disaster. The purpose of this paper is to bridge the gap
between the two standard practices of post-disaster reconstruction: the quickly temporary construction and
the permanent solution with longer time to complete.
Design/methodology/approach – The modular school design prototype was developed based on three
design criteria established to achieve a relatively quick construction with good quality as a post-disaster
permanent solution. The prototype was implemented in Kerandangan Village, Lombok and evaluated to
review its compliance with the design criteria.
Findings – Three design strategies were proposed to respond to the main design criteria: the use of modular
units and components, the material durability and availability, and the “plug-and-play” configuration system.
Through these strategies, the prototype demonstrated the ability to perform as a permanent solution to be
implemented in a short time. The prototype evaluation suggests some possible improvement to ensure a more
efficient process and further replicability.
Originality/value – The development of the modular design bridges the gap between temporary and
permanent approach for post-disaster school reconstruction. The highlighted criteria and the proposed design
strategies contribute to the “build back better” attempt by providing better learning experiences for children
through a replicable modular design that could be flexibly adapted to various local contexts.
Keywords Earthquake, Flexibility, Modular design, School, Post-disaster, Modular construction
Paper type Case study

Introduction
Natural disasters, such as earthquakes, have been a global phenomenon that destroys our
built environment and affects a large number of people. The 7 Richter Scale earthquake that
struck Lombok Island, Indonesia on 5 August 2018 followed by a series of aftershocks had
destroyed approximately 124.423 houses and 3.818 public facilities, including 2.176 schools.
Another 7,4 Richter Scale earthquakes followed by tsunamis and liquefaction occurred in
Central Sulawesi, destroying no less than 67,310 houses and 2,736 schools (BNPB - Badan
Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana, 2018). These are only some among many other
disasters that occur in many parts of the world, with no less than 216 million people affected International Journal of Disaster
by disasters every year (United Nations Development Programme, 2016). Resilience in the Built
Environment
In responding to the occurrence of the disaster, various efforts have been made by many © Emerald Publishing Limited
1759-5908
agencies, including government, architects and designers, non-government organisations DOI 10.1108/IJDRBE-10-2019-0070
IJDRBE (NGOs) and others, through various post-disaster recovery programs (Charlesworth, 2014).
The post-disaster recovery stages consist of the emergency phase, the recovery phase, and
the permanent phase (Corsellis and Vitale, 2014). The speed of construction becomes a
priority to respond quickly to the post-disaster situation. However, the quick construction
usually results in the temporary facilities, which tend to compromise many design aspects
and the qualities of spaces. Before the permanent recovery phase is completed, people
affected by disasters are forced to live in temporary facilities that could not adequately
support their normal daily life.
The journey to normality has always been the primary goal of any post-disaster recovery
programs, to restore everyday life within the shortest time possible. The shelter for living
tends to be the main focus of the recovery while other facilities such as schools which are
also essential for normal everyday life (Félix et al., 2015) are rarely considered during the
immediate recovery phase. Disaster disrupts the provision of the basic needs of children
(Becker-Blease et al., 2010), including access for education. An immediate recovery of school
is essential for children affected by the disaster to give back their rights for education. In
reality, the school reconstruction is usually included in the permanent reconstruction agenda
(Lizarralde, 2010) taking place years after the disaster.
The rebuilding after disaster incorporates an opportunity to “build back better” (Fan,
2013). The rebuilding process not merely restores the original condition but becomes an
opportunity to provide a better quality of facilities and services. This paper aims to explore
the possible innovative design and construction approach for post-disaster situations. In
particular, this paper proposed a modular design prototype and construction strategies for
schools that could be implemented quickly, to reduce the duration of the transition phase
from the temporary recovery to the permanent one, without compromising the quality of
space. The prototype was implemented in a case study of Sekolah Indonesia Cepat Tanggap
in Kerandangan Village, Lombok after the 2018 earthquake. The project was an initiative to
provide a quick solution for the school reconstruction, as suggested by the name: sekolah
means school; cepat tanggap means quick response. Lessons learned from the prototype
development indicate a further possibility for implementation and replicability in various
contexts and conditions.

Between temporary and permanent construction for post-disaster recovery

In general, there are two kinds of practices of construction in post-disaster recovery: the
quick temporary construction, and the permanent construction that usually takes years after
the disaster. The quick construction is commonly implemented during the recovery phase
by providing emergency and transitional shelter, then followed by a permanent construction
in the later stage of rehabilitation and reconstruction (Ahmed, 2011).
The nature of the construction in the emergency and transitional stage is relatively quick,
temporary, and highly replicable, and this could raise many issues. Many buildings
constructed during the emergency response and at the very early recovery stage tend to be
vulnerable due to their inadequate design and poor construction quality (Shrestha et al.,
2012; Miyamoto et al., 2011). This could happen not only because of the short duration of
time to design and construct the building, but also due to the restricted access towards the
adequate material resources. The vulnerability could raise further issues of safety for the
users of the building.
Another issue which revolves around the temporary construction is regarding the
replicability and future use of the temporary units (Félix et al., 2015). On the one hand, such
replicability allows the implementation of the building in various contexts; on the other
hand, it implies the lack of contextual sensibility and ownership by the local community and Modular
could result in the future abandonment of the building. school design
In post-disaster recovery, the long term and permanent solution are as important as the
emergency ones (Gunawardena et al., 2014). The post-disaster building design and
construction must be supported with a strategy for “building back better” (Platt, 2018; Fan,
2013). Despite the urge to construct the building as fast as possible, the reconstruction
process must consider careful planning including land use, safety, good design, community
involvement and cost efficiency (Platt, 2018). The strategy must set the objective beyond the
fast reconstruction (Lyons et al., 2010) in order to offer more positive impact and
improvement compared to the pre-disaster conditions (Celentano et al., 2019)
The permanent reconstruction stage could take up to five years after the disaster to begin
(Gunawardena et al., 2014). This is usually due to some challenges such as the institutional
arrangement, the involvement of various stakeholders, the material procurement, and the
availability of labour (Ahmed, 2011). However, this prolonged process gives the opportunity
to have a design with better contextual sensibility and involvement of local people. This
participatory approach rarely occurs in post-disaster construction in earlier emergency
stages, which is usually built by the construction workers and professionals. They tend to
result in the lack of awareness towards social and cultural aspects of the local society
(Ahmed, 2011; Rahmayati, 2016). It becomes necessary that the planning of post-disaster
recovery should involve the local people, to make the building appropriately situated in the
context, promote the sense of ownership and the future sustainability of the building.
The discussion above illustrates the contrasting practices of temporary and permanent
approaches to post-disaster reconstruction. In the early phase, the practices are dominated
by the construction of the quick yet temporary buildings. Meanwhile, in the later phase, the
practice focuses on somewhat permanent facilities, yet taking an extended period of
construction. This paper argues the necessity to develop a post-disaster reconstruction
approach that could bridge the two practices. This attempt becomes a key to allow the
affected communities to return to normal life as soon as possible and to have a better quality
of living.

Methodology
This study was aimed at exploring the relevant design strategies for post-disaster school
building reconstruction that could bridge the gap between the temporary and permanent
approaches. The study was conducted as the “research through making” (Thün and
Velikov, 2011) through the on-site construction of 1:1 design prototype . The method of the
study comprises three parts. The first part is the development of design criteria. A literature
study was conducted to explore the key criteria that could bridge the gap between the two
common practices of post-disaster reconstruction, and to review the existing modular
construction approaches. Three criteria were emerged as the basis for further design
development: the quick construction, material durability and availability, and the flexibility
and adaptability of the system. In the second part of the study, the appropriate design
strategies and construction system were developed to address the criteria for a quick yet
permanent quality school building. The design strategies were implemented through the 1:1
design prototype in a case study of Sekolah Indonesia Cepat Tanggap (SICT) in
Kerandangan Village. Lombok. The third part was the prototype evaluation to review the
extent to which the modular system appropriately addressed the design criteria. The
observation was conducted throughout the construction process to identify the relevant
issues and opportunities related to the three main design criteria. The observation was also
IJDRBE complemented by evaluation from various stakeholders involved in the process, such as the
contractor, the workers, and the users.

Development of modular design criteria

The main challenge of post-disaster reconstruction lies in the negotiation among the speed
of construction, proper building quality, contextual sensibility, and the social aspects as
highlighted in the “building back better” idea (Platt, 2018; Fan, 2013). Based on the
discussion of the two common practices of post-disaster reconstruction, there are three
criteria that emerged to achieve a quick, permanent and contextual design solution. First,
the system should be able to be implemented within the shortest time possible. Second, the
system should use locally sourced, durable materials to allow the building to resist for a
relatively long period of time. Third, the system should allow the flexible configuration of
the units to adapt to the different site contexts and various community needs.
The proposed three criteria could be implemented in the post-disaster reconstruction
through a modular approach, as one of the systemic construction approaches (Lawson et al.,
2014). Modular construction has been implemented in many post-disaster situations as an
appropriate strategy to reduce the time gap between the temporary phase to a permanent
one (Gunawardena et al., 2014). Modular construction systems have also been applied for
school buildings (Lawson et al., 2014; Smith, 2010), which allow integration with landscapes,
flexible classroom programmes, incorporation of local materials and sustainability. Such
potential could be explored for its further application in post-disaster school reconstruction.
The modular system is usually prefabricated in a factory and installed on sites (Lawson
et al., 2014). It offers an assembly system that can be applied in both temporary and more
permanent buildings (Sharafi et al., 2018). Modular construction systems consist of
subsystems which integrate systemic coordination of standardised dimensions (Staib et al.,
2008), hence allowing for mass production, combination and replacement (Ahn and Kim,
2014; Isaac et al., 2014). Such systems could be constructed quickly (Isaac et al., 2014;
Lawson et al., 2014), and become a preferable approach for post-disaster situations
(Gunawardena et al., 2014).
The choice of materials plays an important role in the development of modular
construction systems. Modular construction often employs materials such as steel, concrete,
and timber (Lawson et al., 2014; Staib et al., 2008), and each requires its own assembly
techniques. The modular construction tends to use less material with less material waste
(Lawson et al., 2014). Consideration of material durability becomes important in the modular
building system, in order to ensure efficiency in the construction process and the quality of
the built project. The construction assembly methods and construction details play a vital
role in ensuring building durability. The systemic coordination of modular construction
could potentially overcome the issues of construction methods in many post-disaster
reconstruction projects (Miyamoto et al., 2011) and minimise the discrepancies between
design and construction (Choudhry et al., 2018).
There is, however, a drawback with modular systems. The implementation requires the
delivery of modules to the site, hence creating transportation issues (Lawson et al., 2014;
Smith, 2010). Post-disaster situations may create more complex challenges for means and
methods of transportation, thus may significantly increase the cost. This study looks into
the possibility of a modular construction system that does not depend on off-site modular
unit fabrication, but considers the involvement of substantial on-site works and the
utilisation of locally available materials.
The modular construction system is especially relevant for post-disaster reconstruction
because it provides an opportunity for “future renovation and adaptation of buildings to
varying user needs” (Isaac et al., 2014, p. 275). The use of subsystems of components and Modular
elements makes the modular construction system open and flexible towards combinations school design
and compositions (Ahn and Kim, 2014; Isaac et al., 2014). Although the modular construction
system uses standardised industrial components, it does not necessarily result in the
uniformity of design (Kroll, 1986). This demonstrates the potential of modular construction
systems as a flexible and adaptable strategy in response to various post-disaster contexts.

Development of modular design prototype

Based on the above design criteria, the modular design strategies were developed as an
attempt to develop a rather quick but permanent solution for school building reconstruction.
The strategies were implemented in the prototype of Sekolah Indonesia Cepat Tanggap
(SICT) project after the 2018 Lombok earthquake. The design prototype was built for
Riyadlul Wardiyah primary school and kindergarten in Kerandangan Village. The school
building was almost entirely damaged due to a series of earthquakes in August and
September 2018. There were approximately 138 pupils and 16 teachers affected by the
earthquake. This project responded to the main criteria of post-disaster reconstruction with
three design strategies as shown in Table 1.

Modular components and units

The core strategy in the SICT project is the use of modular components that could be
combined into various modular units. In this modular system, components refer to building
elements such as structure, walls, roofs, windows, and doors, while units refer to the
modular units that are utilised as spaces for activities. There are five main modular units of
SICT: classroom, transitional space, corridor, toilet, and tribune units (Figure 1). The
classroom unit has four types of walls which have different combinations of wall panels,
windows, and doors. These wall components are assembled based on functional needs.
The components and units were designed and developed based on the standard material
sizes available in the local market (Figure 2). The available dimension of the hollow steel
bars in the local market, which is 6000 mm, became the basis for determining the dimensions
for each structural part for efficient use. Meanwhile, the available dimension of the fibre-
cement boards, which is 1220 mm x 2440 mm, became the basis to compose the wall panels
of the modular units. The efficient use of materials resulted in a minimum cutting process
that made the construction faster. Even when the cutting was necessary, the configuration
of the components was determined in such a way to ensure that all parts of the materials are
used efficiently.

Characteristics of modular construction Modular prototype design

Design criteria system strategies

Quick construction Coordinated system of modular Modular components

components Modular units
Material durability Standardised materials Durable materials
Locally available
materials
On-site construction Table 1.
Flexibility and Open and flexible system Plug-and-play Design criteria and
adaptability to various configuration modular design
contexts and needs strategies
IJDRBE

Figure 1.
Modular units and
modular components

Material durability
The design utilises hollow steel bars as the main structure and the fibre-cement boards as
the wall materials. Steel has a good structural behaviour with a great tensile and
compressive strength (Staib et al., 2008) and the fibre-cement boards are considered a green,
strong, and durable material (Ranachowski and Schabowicz, 2018). They are produced in
standardised dimension, and their dimensional accuracy is beneficial to be used in modular
construction.
Some material treatments were needed to improve the durability performance. Anti-
corrosion coating was applied on the hollow steel bars used for the main structure to
ensure durability. The 8 mm fibre-cement boards were installed as two-layer wall
construction, to ensure sturdiness and durability of the walls for use by the children.
The metal sheets of the roof panels were added with an insulation layer underneath to
create better comfort for the indoor spaces. Aluminium door and window frames were
used for the wall openings as they had excellent durability and were compatible with
the overall construction process.
 Modular
school design

Figure 2.
“Plug-and-play”
configuration of the
modular units

The construction assembly methods and construction details are essential to ensure the
durability of the building. This project paid a significant amount of attention to details. All
the components were carefully measured and cut. The precise construction method was
meant to reduce the risk of having excess or unwanted gaps between materials without
neglecting the requirements for thermal control and various functional purposes.

“Plug-and-play” configuration of modular units

The third design strategy was “plug-and-play” configuration of the modular components
and units on a particular building site. The design of the modular units is based on the idea
“to construct things with interchangeable parts” (Kroll, 1986, p. 83). The modular design
considers the use of components to create the variety of units. By carefully considering the
details of each component, it is possible to create various units for different functions. The
classroom unit, as a central modular unit in the whole design, consists of wall components
that allow the unit to be transformed into various functional programs such as library,
laboratory, and teacher’s office.
The five types of modular units could be flexibly configured through a “plug-and-play”
system to create a different arrangement of spaces for various learning activities needed by
the users. The configuration allows the flexibility for various scenarios of use that may
change from time to time (Brand, 1995) The “plug-and-play” approach allows the
IJDRBE construction to begin with the essential parts immediately after the disaster while allowing
the future extension and development as necessary. The approach not only results in the
adaptability for the future needs of the school but also allows the implementation in
different site contexts. The “plug-and-play” configuration could respond to different site
shapes and sizes and adapt to the various surrounding environments; it allows flexibility for
the design to manoeuvre within the existing site.

Evaluation of Sekolah Indonesia Cepat Tanggap modular design prototype

Construction process
The key to the quick construction in this project lies in the development of modular
components that are assembled into modular units. In this system, the components are
developed based on the size of the materials available in the local market, minimising the
distribution and transportation time. In comparison to other approaches of post-disaster
construction that often use prefabricated materials (International Organization for
Migration, 2012), this approach offers an easier and often cheaper option.
The overall construction process of the building units was standardised into particular
steps to ensure the effective construction of each modular unit (Plate 1). This strategy allows
the project to be constructed quickly as the design of components and units are systemically
coordinated. In building a pair of the modular units, the structure could be erected within
approximately five days and the construction until finishing steps could be completed
within two weeks. The whole prototype consisting of a kindergarten and a primary school,
was completed within less than two months (Figure 3).
The speed of the construction was also supported by the dry construction system done
by local workers, welders and masons. The construction time length could even be reduced
as the workers become more familiar with the methods and sequences. An issue that could
prolong the construction process was the discrepancies between the modular system
guidelines and the on-site application by inexperienced workers. This indicates the
importance of clear guidelines on construction methods. During the construction, on-site
adjustment and evaluation were possible for quick decision making and monitoring of
construction techniques. The time length of construction could be further reduced by
increasing the number of field workers and constructing several modular units in parallel by
different groups of workers.

Material evaluation
The quick construction of this project was achieved without compromising the durability of
the building. This was achieved through the careful choice of materials, the necessary
treatment for each component, and the appropriate construction assembly methods. Post-
disaster reconstruction is notorious for its inadequate construction methods and detailing
quality which could pose further risks for the users (Miyamoto et al., 2011). SICT prototype
sought to minimise the discrepancies between design and construction, particularly in terms
of architectural details, structural details, materials and quality of construction (Choudhry
et al., 2018), through precise measurement and appropriate assembly of all parts. Therefore,
the component design of the components and the construction details could elevate the
quality and extend the durability of the considerably simple and cheap materials.
In terms of overall structural strength, there was evidence that the built prototype has
survived several earthquakes which hit Lombok again in 2019. This indicates that the
modular system and the chosen materials offer intended quality and strength as a
permanent solution for post-disaster situations. Further research on the structural and
 Modular
school design

Figure 3.
Construction steps of
the modular units

material performance of this prototype, however, is necessary to ensure the long term
structural durability.

Flexibility and adaptability of modular configuration

In developing design strategies to respond to the three main criteria, it is essential to
acknowledge the relationship between the building construction system and the
architectural program (Kroll, 1986). The main challenge in the modular system design is on
how the design of components could accommodate the spatial program appropriately. The
IJDRBE modular components and units of SICT responded to the criteria of flexibility and
adaptability through the “plug-and-play” configuration, which could be adaptable to
different contexts and spatial needs.
The modular design prototype has become an attempt not merely for the physical
reconstruction after the disaster; it demonstrates an initiative to “build back better” (Fan,
2013; Lyons et al., 2010) through the provision of an integrated learning environment. The
reconstructed school in Kerandangan Village consists of a variety of indoor learning spaces
and outdoor spaces such as open stages, shaded play spaces, corridors and school gardens.
The modular units could be flexibly configured based on the existing site conditions and
spatial needs. creating extended learning experiences (Plate 1).
The configuration of the modular units enables both the kindergarten and the primary
school to have their own spaces as well as shared spaces. It allows further expansion, if
necessary, for the future development of the school. The configuration results in the
composition of outdoor spaces as the “cool pockets” (Suryantini et al., 2018) that allow cross
ventilation and shading, creating a comfortable temperature within the units. The openings
provide the necessary lighting for indoor learning activities during the day. The quality of
spaces created through the implementation of the modular system ensures the better
provision for children’s learning activities compared to their school prior to the disaster.

Conclusion
The implementation of the modular system in the SICT design prototype demonstrates that
the relatively quick period of construction does not necessarily compromise the quality
of the facilities provided for the community affected by the disaster. The approach for post-
disaster reconstruction is not always about choosing between quick but temporary and
permanent yet slow construction. The SICT prototype demonstrates how the design
strategies that address the criteria of quick construction, material durability, flexibility and
adaptability could lead to a permanent solution within a relatively short period. The quick
construction ensures the immediate response after the disaster, yet the material durability

Plate 1.
The new
environment that
promotes various
learning experiences
allows for the permanent solution. The modular construction system could skip the Modular
transitional recovery phase and move straight to the full reconstruction; thus, the normal school design
school life could resume within the shortest time possible. The modular school design
demonstrates the capability to respond to different contexts due to its flexible configuration
that could adapt to different site contexts and various spatial needs of the school
community. This project suggests the importance of creating design innovation that
promotes sustainable futures (Suwartha et al., 2017) through a modular building system that
could offer better learning opportunities for the children affected by the disaster.
The prototype offers contribution in the modular building system that does not depend
on the off-site modular unit fabrication. The development of on-site construction approach
with locally available materials allows the implementation in various areas affected by the
disaster, including the remote areas with limited transportation access. The system could be
modified by utilising available materials around the project locations. The on-site modular
construction also allows the involvement of the local communities. While the construction
length may be relatively longer than the installation of modular prefabrication system, this
approach offers higher adaptability to the local context and the user participation.
The modular design is ready for further replicability in other areas affected by the
disaster. Following the prototype building construction in Lombok, the system has been
implemented in other locations affected by the earthquake: Sumbawa, Palu and Sigi. Further
research and development is necessary to enhance the values of this modular system.
Further investigation may include the study on the physical performance of the modular
units and the systematic post-occupancy evaluation involving various stakeholders. The
development may include the training of the local workers to ensure the application of
correct construction techniques and the detailed guidebook to minimise the discrepancies
between design and realisation, to ensure the replicability of this modular system.

References
Ahmed, I. (2011), “An overview of post-disaster permanent housing reconstruction in developing
countries”, International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, Vol. 2 No. 2,
pp. 148-164, doi: 10.1108/17595901111149141.
Ahn, Y.H. and Kim, K.-T. (2014), “Sustainability in modular design and construction: a case study of
‘the stack”, International Journal of Sustainable Building Technology and Urban Development,
Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 250-259, doi: 10.1080/2093761X.2014.985758.
Becker-Blease, K.A., Turner, H.A. and Finkelhor, D. (2010), “Disasters, victimisation, and children’s
mental health”, Child Development, Vol. 81 No. 4, pp. 1040-1052, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-
8624.2010.01453.x.
BNPB - Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana (2018), available at: https://bnpb.go.id/Indonesia-
gempabumi-lombok (accessed 28 August 2019)
Brand, S. (1995), How Buildings Learn: What Happens after They’re Built, Penguin Books, New York,
NY.
Celentano, G., Escamilla, E.Z., Göswein, V. and Habert, G. (2019), “A matter of speed: the impact of
material choice in post-disaster reconstruction”, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction,
Vol. 34, pp. 34-44, doi: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2018.10.026.
Charlesworth, E.R. (2014), Humanitarian Architecture: 15 Stories of Architects Working after Disaster,
Routledge, London and New York, NY.
Choudhry, R.M., Gabriel, H.F., Khan, M.K. and Azhar, S. (2018), “Causes of discrepancies between
design and construction in the Pakistan construction industry”, Journal of Construction in
Developing Countries, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 1-18, doi: 10.21315/jcdc2017.22.2.1.
IJDRBE Corsellis, T. and Vitale, A. (Eds). (2014), “Transitional settlement and reconstruction after natural
disasters (field edition)”, available at: https://www.humanitarianlibrary.org/resource/
transitional-settlement-and-reconstruction-after-natural-disasters-field-edition-0 (accessed 12
May 2019).
Fan, L. (2013), Disaster as Opportunity? Building Back Better in Aceh, Myanmar and Haiti, Overseas
Development Institute, London.
Félix, D., Monteiro, D., Branco, J.M., Bologna, R. and Feio, A. (2015), “The role of temporary
accommodation buildings for post-disaster housing reconstruction”, Journal of Housing and the
Built Environment, Vol. 30 No. 4, pp. 683-699, doi: 10.1007/s10901-014-9431-4.
Gunawardena, T., Mendis, P., Tuan, N.D., Aye, L. and Crawford, R. (2014), “Time efficient post-disaster
housing reconstruction with prefabricated modular structures”, Open House International,
Vol. 39 No. 3, pp. 59-69.
International Organization for Migration (2012), “Transitional shelter guidelines–world”, available at:
https://reliefweb.int/report/world/transitional-shelter-guidelines (accessed 12 May 2019).
Isaac, S., Bock, T. and Stoliar, Y. (2014), “A new approach to building design modularization”, Procedia
Engineering, Vol. 85, pp. 274-282, doi: 10.1016/j.proeng.2014.10.552.
Kroll, L. (1986), The Architecture of Complexity, Batsford, London.
Lawson, M., Raymond, O. and Goodier, C. (Eds) (2014), Design in Modular Construction, CRC Press,
London.
Lizarralde, G. (2010), “Decentralizing (re)construction: agriculture cooperative as a vehicle for
reconstruction in Colombia”, in Lyons, M., Schilderman, T. and Boano, C. (Eds), Building Back
Better: Delivering People-Centred Housing Reconstruction at Scale, Practical Action Pub,
Warwickshire.
Lyons, M., Schilderman, T. and Boano, C. (Eds). (2010), Building Back Better: Delivering People-Centred
Housing Reconstruction at Scale, Practical Action Pub, Warwickshire.
Miyamoto, H.K., Gilani, A.S.J. and Wada, A. (2011), “Damage mitigation for school buildings in
seismically vulnerable regions”, International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built
Environment, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 8-29, doi: 10.1108/17595901111108344.
Platt, S. (2018), “Factors affecting the speed and quality of post-disaster recovery and resilience”, in
Rupakhety, R. and Ólafsson, S. (Eds), Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics in
Memory of Ragnar Sigbjörnsson, ICESD 2017, Geotechnical, Geological, and Earthquake
Engineering, Vol. 44, pp. 369-403, doi:10.1007/978-3-319-62099-2_19
Rahmayati, Y. (2016), “Reframing “building back better” for post-disaster housing design: a community
perspective”, International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, Vol. 7 No. 4,
pp. 344-360, doi: 10.1108/IJDRBE-05-2015-0029.
Ranachowski, Z. and Schabowicz, K. (Eds) (2018), The Fabrication, Testing and Application of Fibre
Cement Boards, Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Sharafi, P., Nemati, S., Samali, B. and Ghodrat, M. (2018), “Development of an innovative modular foam-
filled panelized system for rapidly assembled postdisaster housing”, Buildings, Vol. 8 No. 8,
pp. 97, doi: 10.3390/buildings8080097.
Shrestha, H.D., Yatabe, R., Bhandary, N.P. and Subedi, J. (2012), “Vulnerability assessment and
retrofitting of existing school buildings: a case study of Aceh”, International Journal of Disaster
Resilience in the Built Environment, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 52-65, doi: 10.1108/17595901211201132.
Smith, R.E. (2010), Prefab Architecture: A Guide to Modular Design and Construction, Wiley.
Staib, G., Dörrhöfer, A. and Rosenthal, M.J. (2008), Components and Systems: Modular Construction:
Design, Structure, New Technologies, 1st ed., Institut für internationale Architektur-
Dokumentation, Birkhäuser.
Suryantini, R., Harahap, M.M.Y., Yatmo, Y.A. and Putra, N. (2018), “Thinking ecology for architecture: Modular
exploration of cool pocket”, E3S Web of Conferences, Vol. 67, pp. 04041, doi: 10.1051/e3sconf/
20186704041. school design
Suwartha, N., Ardiyansyah, A., Berawi, M.A., Surjandari, I., Zagloel, T.Y.M., Atmodiwirjo, P. and
Yatmo, Y.A. (2017), “Science, technology, and innovation for sustainable world”, International
Journal of Technology, Vol. 8 No. 6, pp. 979, doi: 10.14716/ijtech.v8i6.1151.
Thün, G. and Velikov, K.. (2011), “Action research and prototype testbeds: prioritizing collaborative
making in architectural research”, Proceedings of ARCC 2011: Considering Research: Reflecting
upon Current Themes in Architecture Research, pp. 315-325., available at: www.arcc-journal.org/
index.php/repository/issue/view/15
United Nations Development Programme (2016), Disaster Recovery: Challenges and Lessons, United
Nations Development Programme, New York, NY.

Corresponding author
Yandi Andri Yatmo can be contacted at: [email protected]

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: [email protected]