regulating architects

30Jun09

.. milis iai-architect ramai membicarakan banyak hal seputar profesi arsitek. standar honorarium, pendidikan arsitek, kode etik, sampai undang-undang arsitek. sekilas terlihat banyak kegamangan dalam berpraktik tapi tidak dilandasi dengan kepranataan yang jelas dan tertib. arsitek di indonesia mungkin akan berubah, dari unregulated menjadi regulated profession. saya kutip sebuah artikel berkaitan dengan hal tersebut.

.

Regulating Architects Across the Globe

‘architect’ is not a simple label easily transferred

There is little uniformity internationally on the regulation of architects. That the term ‘architect’ is not a simple label easily transferred from one nation to another can be seen by examining data for the numbers of architects per capita. In some countries we find extremely high numbers: Japan, Italy and Greece each have over 1,300 architects per million inhabitants. Is there really that much more building design going on there than in, say, Chile, the UK, France, Australia or Hungary, each with around 500 architects per million? Could Canada, Poland, Russia, and Korea—all of whom have less than 300 architects per million—really find work for all those other architects if their numbers were quadrupled to Italian proportions?
.

Different places, different architects

One of the striking things about architecture is the tremendous variety of ways in which different countries have decided to regulate it (or not). Some countries, such as Australia at the present, will let anyone do the work of the architect, and only restrict the title of architect. This is also the case in the United Kingdom, Turkey, New Zealand and the Netherlands.

In some places, such as most of the American states, both the title is regulated and also the work done. Only those people with the title architect can do the work of an architect. Even here there are many exceptions: California, for example, lets anyone design small-scale residential buildings. This is exactly the market in which Australian building designers find most of their work.

A very few places have even tighter restrictions. In Austria, not only do you have to have a degree from an Austrian university, but you must also be an Austrian citizen to practice. No foreigner can be an architect in Austria: it’s an all-Aryan profession.
How you acquire the title is also quite variable. In many countries anyone with a degree in architecture is entitled to call themselves an architect, even if they have never laid a pen to paper: Belgium, France, Egypt and Peru do it this way. The Japanese, on the other hand, require no degree, and only ask for a few years training in an architectural office, followed by an examination. In Korea you don’t even have to finish high school, but you must complete 14 years of practical experience. Graduate with an architecture degree, though, and this reduces to five years.

Again, what you need to know varies from nation to nation. Australian architects would be considered defective in those countries whose education imparts a lot of structural engineering knowledge to the architect. Spanish architects deal with highly technical buildings, such as industrial plant, that English-speaking architects tend to leave to engineers. Similarly, architects in the Benelux countries produce technical drawings that would be handled by engineers in Australia. Norwegian architects also invariably handle town-planning, which is left to a separate occupation here.
Finally, in quite a few countries there are neither any restrictions on who can use the title architect nor on the sort of work that people can do. They have adopted the same approach to the architect as Australia has to the accountant. In Denmark, Finland, Ireland, Norway and Sweden, they have decided that as long as the buildings accord with building regulations, they don’t really care who designs them.

Ulasan lebih lengkap dapat diperoleh dari sumber-sumber ini:
Tentang profesi arsitektur: http://www.archsoc.com/kcas/sitemap.html
Tentang profesi di Australia: http://www.archsoc.com/kcas/ProdCom.html



5 Responses to “regulating architects”

  1. 1 Dian

    Than… how about Indonesia?
    Other countries have their own way and experienced on handling their problem. Level of knowledge and facilities in other countries is different too. Basic Educations system is also different. Those are add up into the common knowledge of common peoples. Some countries have their thousands years of history of Master Artisan which than develop become Master Builder. This is still use in some countries like japan and korea; in fact I personally think China should develop it as well. But they follow mainly American system.
    I personally think that Indonesia in fact by historical fact have a very good Master Artisan include Master Builder knowledge. Unfortunately; the introduction of colonial educations had put this knowledge and respect to this trade to become below the colonial school. Until today.. this knowledge is never been develop and never been respected at all. They left as an unknown people and the knowledge slowly disappears… In some villages you still can found them living anonymous with their creations.
    How do we want to grow bigger without understanding who we are? How do we understand who we are if we don’t look at the history of ourself in a clean and clear view. I love my country and I love my profession ‘architect’.
    Only my humble opinion written with my limited knowledge.

  2. 2 laras

    Good point Dian.
    Unfortunately the main stream to become an Architect in the world is through formal education.This fact is also being the common understanding, as written by the world’s architect organization ( UIA ? ).
    I’m second to you and I believe Pak Endi and IAI will gladly put acknowledgement and endorsement to those talented “traditional architects”.

  3. 3 tipsyboo

    I don’t deny the importance of education. Education is second to none. But, who we are? What we are …..? Why we are ….? Which way we want to go? There are hundreds system available in the worlds… I personally think; none of them is good for Indonesia and none of them is bad for Indonesia and none of them suit Indonesia too. I am only look at it from a distances; I am not in it. I am intensively reading every development in Indonesia architecture as much as I can. I am happy and sad about it.
    First think; which I think should be done by IAI since long time ago is to find out the name of all of the big architects of Indonesia. The Master Architect of all the Candi’s; the Master Architect of all the Istana’s, Mesjid’s, Benteng and All heritage building all over Indonesia (colonial or non colonial). What for? You can measure how high is the level of your educations by measuring how you appreciate your history. To me; only when IAI can announce their respect and given those people (they are all died now) the highest appreciations and ‘award’ than I know where IAI will go. If you don’t know where you coming from than you will never know where you will go. All of them are ‘The Patron of Indonesian Architecture’.
    I just regret; why nobody respect them. To me personally; it is how can people respect you when you never respect yourself.

  4. 4 e

    thank you all for your concern. we don’t forget the importance of history as you don’t deny the importance of education. this year is the golden year of iai, the good and once a life time moment to give more respect to history.
    life goes on, and history is just the best foundation to move onward ..

    @ tipsyboo: you may learn from many sources that there were acknowledgements to history (read: incld. architects) ..😉

  5. 5 socarch

    The ArchSoc website referenced above is run by disgruntled ex-academic Garry Stevens. Unprofessional comments are littered across the site. It has no credibility as a ranking of architecture schools. His quantitative criteria to rank the “Best Architecture Schools” is to count up the number of publications by academics held in libraries such as the RIBA. This is an arbitrary measure that will tell a prospective student next to nothing about the quality of teaching and research in any particular school. The site is entirely unreliable as a guide and should be avoided.

    Prospective students deciding which Architecture school to apply for should carefully investigate the research culture and teaching outcomes of any particular school they are interested in.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: