CULTURE AND BUILT ENVIRONMENT A THEORITICAL PERSPECTIVE

CULTURE AND BUILT ENVIRONMENT

a Theoritical perspective

I Made Sukadana

e-mail imade.sukadana@gmail.com

Department OfArchitecture Faculty OfEngineering University ofUdayana University ofUdayana Campus, Bukit Jimbaran Badung 80361

Bali Indonesia

Abstract

Culture is a_jfected by the environmental demands, and culture influences what people do toward the environment. What remarkable is that culture and environment influenced each other They are frequently responsive to the demands of the environment. Furthermore, culture influences people in shaping built environment such as, cities, villages, houses, and farms. Culture influences environment through travelling, commerce, mass media, and missionaries ofreligion. Contact among otherpeople, ideas and traditions effected cultural change. As a result;people are able to do contextualization that is reject, adopt, and accept the previous culture and it a_jfected the built environment arrangement.

Key words: culture, people, contextualization, environment

Abstrak

Budaya dipengaruhi oleh tuntutan lingkungan, dan budaya mempengaruhi apa yang dilakukan manusia terhadap lingkungan. Budaya dan lingkungan saling mempengaruhi satu dengan yang lain. Mereka sering bereaksi pada tuntutan-tuntutan dari lingkungan tersebut. Selanjutnya, budaya mempengaruhi manusia dalam pembentukan lingkungan terbangun seperti, perkotaan, perkampungan, pemukiman, dan pertanian. Budaya mempengaruhi lingkungan melalui perjalanan manusia dari satu tempat ketempat lain, melalui perdagangan, mas media, dan penyebaran agama. Persentuhan atau hubungan antara manusia, ide-ide, dan tradisi, menyebabkan perubahan budaya. Sebagai akibat, manusia dapat melakukan kontektualisasi yaitu menolak, menyesuaikan, dan menerima budaya terdahulu dan hal itu mempengaruhi perencanaan lingkungan terbangun.

Kata kunci: budaya, manusia, kontektualisasi, lingkungan

• 1.    Introduction

Culture is a complex system that comprises of religion, belief, knowledge, values, customs, behaviours, artefacts, morals, and habits obtained by man as a member of society. Culture is the manmade part of the human environment, affected by the environmental demands, influencing what people do toward the environment and in shaping built environment.

Built environments such as space, cities, villages, houses and farms based on their own religion and belief, affect the psychological processes which consists of mental and behavioural activities. Culture causes concern on what people do and how they act in relation to the environment. Cultural contact produces cultural change and contact between the local and other cultures resulting in contextualization with connotations and meanings

of adaptation, accommodation, actualisation, indigenisation, enculturation, incarnation and intercultural communication.

The aim of this theoretical study is to examine people’s needs in order to suit their built environment in relation with housing. Various groups of peoples have come into contact with one another and ideas and traditions have been exchanged verbally. In this case, people are able to reject, adopt or accept, and adapt to the previous culture. When individuals or groups undergo cultural change, adaptation to the environment and non-environment elements may be needed. From this context, it has been learned that the level of social understanding in the village and housing process undertaken by the user is parallel to their utilitarian and cultural needs.

• 2.    Culture and Environment
  
  Culture

Definition of culture varies and it has developed over time and from generation to generation through learning(Cooper,2001). EdwardTylorin 1871 inhis theses of early Anthropology as the first formal definition of culture stated that culture is complex things that comprises ofbelief, knowledge, custom, morals, law, art and any other capabilities and habits obtained by man as a member of society (Rapoport, K" ' , H^oviMlMa well, offered a simple definition of culture. He stated that “culture is the man-made part of the human environment” (Altman and Chemers, 1984: 3, quoted from Herskovits, 1952, see also Tanner, 1997). Another definition, which is also widely accepted, is “the complete range of objects, values, symbolic meanings and repetitive ways ofbehaving that guide the conduct of individual members of a society” (Titiev, 1959). However,Kluckohn(1951)whonoted a consensus of anthropological definition gives a more comprehensive definition:

. “^Cultu^re^consis^{tsinpatternedwa}y^sof thinking, feeling and reacting, acquired and ^transm^itted m^{ainly by symbols}, constituting the distinctive achievements ^{of h}u^man g^roups,^^includi^{ng th}₅ⁱr ^embodime^{nts in} ^to, ^an^{d ess}e^ntial core of culture consists of traditional (i.e. historically derived and selected) ideas and especially their attached value” (Kluckohn, 1951:85-6).

Rapoport(1987: 10,1989:xiii)explainsculture in two ways. Firstly, culture is a way oflife typical of a group, a system of schemata transmitted symbolically, and a way of coping with the ecological setting. Secondly, culture acts as a blueprint for assembling components, gives meaning to particulars and defines group identity or property. The term culture is too broad and abstract. It should be dismantled in order to clarify its relationship to the built environment. Referring to the culture definition it should be recognised that culture and built environment are not equal and on the same scale or level. Culture is a vast domain while the built environment is a small part of it (Rapoport, 1990: 10). In addition, culture needs to be cut down to size to clarify the concrete and specific variables that are applicable to link them to the built environment.

Liddle (1990) argued that culture is the entire value, beliefs and basic conventional ways upheld by the community. In this sense, the culture of an ethnic group can be studied by observing and analyzing their cultural elements, norms, values, ideas, tradition, custom, and goods including physical environmental, which usually consist of patterns of traditional villages and houses (Sastrowardoyo, 1987). Culture is the system of shared beliefs, values, customs, behaviours, and artefacts that the members of society use to cope with their world and with one another. There are three key components of culture as mentioned by Kuntjaraningrat, (1985: 20) as follows:

• 1)    Concepts and ideas (traditional ideas ^and esp^eciall^{y thei}r ^atta^ched values, symbolic, meanings): refers to beliefs, values and norms of a group of society,

• 2)    Behaviour (ways of thinking, feeling, reacting and behaving): refers to the ^{perceptions an}d ^cogni^tio^ns, ^custom^s and ^behav^{iour (how to} KT.xeo,- t^{o do} things) of a group or society. Culture ^{could be defined as th}e^interactive aggregate of common characteristics that influence a human group’s response to its environment”

. (Hofi^e,≡^     ,  ,

• ³⁾    P^hy^sical o^bJ^ects (^achiev^ements_ι^and theirembodiments inartefacts): culture appears in objects and in the physical environment including architecture.

From the three key components of culture, it can be seen that the concept of culture reflects many

sets of things from abstract principles such as ways ofbehaving and relating to the physical environment.

Environment

Definitions of environment can be found in many books. In the Oxford Dictionary and Thesaurus (2001), the word ‘environment’ means the surrounding and circumstances affecting the person’s life. In this case, surrounding and circumstances are very important things in relating to the life of a person. Perception of environment varies and a number of definitions of environment have been proposed by scholars. Lowton (1970) defines the environment as an ecological system, which consists of five components. First is the individual. Second is the physical environment, the spaces and distances between man and objects, and the resources of the environment. Third is personal environment, consisting of individuals who are important sources of behaviour control, family, friends, and authority figures. Four is the supra personal environment, this refers to the environmental characteristics resulting from the inhabitants’ modal personal characteristics for example, ethnic group, old people, and other specific sub cultures. Last is social environment, which includes social norms and institutions.

In addition Ittelson (1974) defines the environment in seven categories i.e., general ecological interrelationship of all categories; perceptual area; expressive area; domain of aesthetic values of a culture; adaptive area (the extent to which the environment helps or hinders activities); the integrative area (the kinds of social groupings which are facilitated or inhibited by surroundings); and instrumental area, that is, the tools and facilities provided by the environment.

Both definitions include the notion of the environment as behaviour setting, which may be neutral, inhibiting or supportive. On the other hand, physical environment is a term with many dimensions. According to Altman (1984) physical environment can be subdivided into three dimensions. First, natural environment places and geographical features, (for example, mountains, oceans, rivers, and valley) and the environment condition (such as rainfall, weather, flora and fauna). Second, built environment the results of man’s alteration of environment (for example farms,

dwellings, villages, and cities). The last dimension is scale of environment, which consists of different levels of scale i.e., very small built environment such as: living rooms, bedrooms, kitchens and homes, and rather larger built environments, for example, communities, and cities. These dimensions of environment are very important. It includes many things such as the natural environment, flora, fauna, home, spaces and communities.

In addition, Altman (1984) emphasizes that physical environments and cultures are linked with people and various psychological processes, which consists of mental and behavioural activities. Mental activities are things, which happen in people minds such as what they hear, see, smell, and interpret about the physical environment, plus beliefs and attitudes, positive and negative, concerning the environment. Physical environment affects the psychological processes. In this case, as a result of the cultural views about the functions of the environment in the lives of people, they possibly will learn to build different structures or alter the physical environment. Behaviour activities concern what people do and how they act in relation to the environment. For instance, among a host of others, they attempt to achieve privacy and to establish and control territories, uses of land.

Environment Behaviour

Accordingto Rapoport, (1973a) the interaction of people and physical environment is studied in the environment-behaviour or man-environment. Both of them are natural and man-made and represent the prime subject. Hillier and Hanson (1984) tried to find a relation between abstract immaterial ‘subject’ that is social, cultural and ritual systems, and a material world of ‘objects’ i.e., spatial systems. They argued that “a building, is an object whose spatial form is a form of social ordering with the implication that social ordering already has itself a certain spatial logic to it” (Hillier and Hanson, 1984: 9). This statement is stated at the beginning of an investigation into the environment-behaviour paradigm. Rapoport, one of the founders of environment-behaviour studies who have developed these paradigms stated that these studies as a systematic field of study are recent in origin and there is no data relating to the past (Rapoport, 1973a). Itisahistoricalapproach,where alteration can be observed for a long time.

Observation is very important in abstracting the underlying structure, system and rules behind visible ^mani⅛^ti0n,'.......

Without becoming involved in the more ^gy_ll^er^a∣ a^{rgument ab}o^{ut co}n^sta^ncy ^and change, the point can be made that in our concern with the rapid change in current ^en^{vironments we hav}e ⁿe^{glected the} e^{lement o}f ^cons^tancy ^both ^{in human} e^har^acteristics-p^hysio^logic^{al r}e^ac^tion^s, ^rhythrn^s, ^psyc^hologι^cal n^{eeds an}d a^{lso the evid}eⁿc^{e o}f ph^ysicai s^olutio^ns tf^{the past} as valid experience. The gradual refinement of environments, particularly vernacular ^environm^ent, w^{ould s}e^{em to}Jy^{vide an} essential base for any theory (Rapoport, 1973a: 138).

This argument confirms the value of using historical material, that is, house plans and village layouts in the analysis of spatial arrangements of the vernacular environments of the villages and houses.

• 3.    Culture, Environment and People

The relationship between culture, environment and people has been studied from time to time. It involves several disciplines in the social and behavioural sciences. Human ecologists for example, study migration and settlement patterns, and Anthropologists and Archaeologists are concerned with how people have shaped their homes, communities, and cities in different cultures and periods. Some anthropological and psychological analyses that bear on relations between culture and environment have been done as well and emphasize cultural ecology such as customs, life-style and behaviour in different culture.

According to Altman (1984) there is a close relationship between culture and environment. As seen in Figure 1, there are five important classes of factors.

• 1)    The natural environment includes temperature, rainfall, terrain and geographic features and flora and fauna.

• 2)    The environmental orientation and worldview are global views of the environment that relate to religions, values, and dominant modes of thought.

• 3)    The environmental cognitions include perception, beliefs, and judgments that people make about environments.

• 4)    Environment behaviour and processes such as personal space, territorial behaviour, and privacy are the ways that people use the environment in the course of social relation.

• 5)    Environmental outcomes or end product of behaviour include the results of people’s action that is built environment for example homes, communities, and cities and modification of natural environment such as farms, dams, and climate changes.

The feature of each factor is that of simple connections, and every variable can theoretically serve as either a cause or an effect. For instance, the strong environmental determinist view frequently states that the physical environment affects culture in a one way relationship. All environmental factors play an important role, for example religious conversion (from Hindu to Christianity) can result in drastic alterations of the environment. Therefore, culture can affect environment, and environment can affect culture. Variables in Figure 1 are able to become cause and effect to each other. A change in one part of that network of variables can have impact throughout the system. Rapoport (1990) argued that components of culture are related to components of environment. Some aspects of culture such as lifestyle, behaviours, activity systems, social institutions, social structures, status, power relationship, meanings and so on are translated into some aspect ofbuilt form. Of course, if one or more aspects of cultural experience change it will affect changes in built form.

In terms of the above framework, it is clear that the issue of religion takes place in the system of environmental orientation and world views. The religious convert causes the ‘cause and effect’ in the system especially the environmental behaviours process i.e., privacy, and personal space, also the environmental outcome such as built environment, villages, houses, and so forth (Altman and Chemers, 1984). The religious conversion results in ‘cultural change’ to the converters.

Figure 1. AFrameworkofculture andenvironmentrelation

Environmental

Orientation and

world View

Cosmology

Religion

Values and

Norms

Environmental

Cognitions

Perception

Coding

Memory

Judgements

Natural

Environment

Topography

Climate

Flora and

Fauna

Environmental

Behaviour and

Process

Privacy

Personal space

Territoriality

Environmental

Outcomes

Built environment

Home

Farms

Cities

Source: Altman and Chemers, 1984:10

Culture Change and Environment

Herskovits (1941) stated that "cultural-contact produces cultural dtattgf ^see Kgu_re 2. Ccuta^ct between the local culture and another culture has occurred until recently. Religion for example, Hindu, Buddha, Moslem and Christianity as a part of culture is introduced to another culture in various ways. In terms of the Christianity the spread of Gospel by missionaries to nations in all over the world is based on the Bible verse of

^Genesi^s12^:1;3^:....... c

The lord had said to Abraham, Leave your c^ountr^y, y^our ^people ^an^d yo^ur fa^th^er'^{s house}h^{old and} g^{o to} t^{he land i wi}∏ ^{show yo}u∙_τ ⁱ will^{make y}o^{u i}n^to a^{great nation} and I will bless you; I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing. I will ^bless &^ose who^{bless you} an^{d w}h^oever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on the earth will be blessed through you.” (Genesis, 12:1-3).

From these verses it is clear that Abraham is blessed so that through him and his descendants, all the “peoples” of the world would be blessed. Furthermore, to the wish of God, usually expressed

in the Bible, that all peoples of the earth would worship Him. Consequently, Christian missions go to the whole parts of the world, in order to bring wctshipto^dtoorii^cM^o^

Paul was the first missionary who contextualized the Gospel for the Greek and Roman cultures, allowing them to abandon their Hebrew and Jewish context. In addition McGonigle asserted that the Jewish thinker Pilo (20 B.C.-50 C.E.) soughtharmonybetween Platonic philosophy and Hebrew thought as a bridge ofboth Jewish and Hellenistic culture. In this sense, Jews attempt to find meaning within the Hellenistic culture so that the Gospel would be understood easily by the Greeks. From Greek the Gospel was planted to Western culture. In the West “the Jewish life and culture remain an integral part of the Western experience since the central religious truths and moral values of the west are the inheritance from the Je^slrpecp^M^

Western spead the Gospel to other parts of the world such as African and Asia. In terms of contextualization, the aim is to grasp the essential seed of the Gospel, and embed it in the soil of the foreign culture.

Mastra (1978) asserted that the Gospel is universal and it does not belong to a certain nation or culture, so that Christianity allows many kinds of Christian expression. It will change the culture, language, and behaviour of people into something new. The new expression or the change of a certain culture it will lead to a development of culture. This development is seen as equivalent to ‘culture change’ (Rapoport, 1991). More specifically, Rapoport described that “one is dealing with a form of acculturation since the changes clearly seem to be due, in major part, to intercultural process (contact, interaction or conflict) between the local traditional culture and the modern Western culture” (Rapoport

1991: 36). Peopleinthedevelopingcountriesusually equalize modernisation with westernization. The modern Western culture in this sense is the change of culture from traditional to a modern one, of course it includes the spread the Gospel by the Western missionaries (Covarrubias, 1976). Furthermore, Rapoport asserted that the ‘rejection’ of either traditional or the new components and characteristics of either cultural or built environments attributes are seen as equally unlikely and undesirable. The result of culture change on built environment in many cases will be ‘syncretism’ or ‘synthesis’, between traditional culture and environment as seen in Figure 3.

Figure 2. Culture changes in tandem with built environment

Source: Based on Rapoport (1983a: Fig. 4, p.259).

Figure 3. Identifying the characteristics Oftraditional, changed and new environment

Culture and Religion

„ . Th=Wholereligi_on in Iheworld sueh as Hindu. Buddha, Islam, Christian and the like have they own way to spread their belief. Christian’ missionaries for instanee, introdueed the Gospel into all the nations in most of the world. The Gospel is universal and it does not belong to a eertain nation or eulture, so that Christianity allows many kinds of Christian «pr™^2004:Masha. 1978). Thedospd will transform the eulture, language, and behaviour of people into new meaning, new eontents and enlists them in the serviee of Christ. However, it is diffieult ^to de^eid^e w^hether a ^eusto_m «m be ∙^eeept⅛ ^or should be rejeeted, or adapted (Sookhdeo, 1997).

In Asia, the eontextualisation proeess relates to poverty, pluralism and inter religious dialogues; for the reason that more than three quarters of poor people in the world live in Asia, furthermore most religions sueh as Hindu, Buddha, Christian, and Islam

emerged and grew in Asia, and only a small number of people in Asia are atheist (Siwu, 1996; Sugden, ¹⁹⁹⁷:^Su^kanada,¹⁹⁹⁹⁾.............

^Aeeord.ⁿg to WHarns (²005)^, a good eontextualisation proeess takes aeeount of the loeal eulture and the proeess itselfhappens gradually. In order to understand the eontextualisation proeess, one needs to analyse the methods of the early missionaries introdueing Christianity to the old beliefs. The old belief eulture sueh as ritual, stories, songs, eustom, musie, arts, ete should be reeognized aⁿ<i^we^ll≡^de^rs,∞^d. ™*^is »^f.““^rse a ^ver^y diffieult task for the missionaries beeause beside theology they have to study target eulture as well. As Oliver (2003) noted in his eneyelopaedia, with the expansion the western eolonial powers they needed to understand native eulture. This task was done by missionaries who notwithstanding their eommitment to spread the gospel and eonvert the

heathen, they had to understand people culture as well. However, only a few missionaries could do so, for example, Kraemer, Covarrubias, Swellengrebel and so on. “Often churches are encouraged and challenged to use traditional musical instruments, art forms, dance and other forms in worship but there is a strong hesitancy among Evangelical Christians to use these. This caution prevails among local pastor and missionaries” (Ma, 2000: 73).

In terms of contextualization Hiebert (1997) described that there are three possibilities: things happen to the old culture such as denial of the old or

rejection of contextualization; dealing with the old or critical contextualization and acceptance of the old and uncritical of the old culture. The critical contextualization have to follow with some further steps i.e., gathering information about the old, study biblical teachings about the event, evaluate the old in light of bible teachings and in the last is create new contextualized Christian practice and in this way adapt the old belief. In general the elements of old belief can be rejected, accepted and adapted (see Figured).

Figure 4. Process of critical contextualization

Source: After Hiebert (quoted in William, 2005:121

Contextualisation

According to Baasland (1997), the word Contextualization was unfamiliar to the apostles but the word today has some connotations and meanings i.e., adaptation, accommodation, actualisation, indigenisation, inculturation, incarnation, intercultural communication. The term contextualisation is used for the first time in1972by Shokⁱ_iCo^e_iIn ^a ^Hcattar ^oftbeW^orld Conned ^of ChftAts. H°^wev^er,t^hecon^ceptotanttntntahsar™ is not the same as the earlier concept of indigenization o^ra^ccommodatⁱon^o^hnson,¹⁹9⁷ksoo^khdeo(¹⁹⁹7 defined that contextualization is recognized as the expression of the Gospel through suitable forms within the culture of its recipients. This is a simple definition, and he later on asserted that contextualisation attempts to differentiate the content of the Gospel and the form that express it. Broaderdefinition statedbyNicholls (1979) saidthat “Contextualisation is the translation of the changing co.denr of Ure Gospel of lh^{e k}in^gdo^m mlo ^{verba f}O^{rm me}Onr^ngful to the ^peop^le to to separate culture and within their particular existential situation” (Nicholls, 1979 quoted in Hesselgrave and R^omm^en,2(≡33_y

For the Asians, the message must be concrete, visible, tangible, in the built environment. Altman and Chemers (1984) stated that the role of culture i.e., cosmology, religion and family and social structure is most evident in the house form.

In ^weste^rn s^ociet^y, ^however, ^the hka of th^e home as a religious place may seem strange. Most of religious activities generally use the church rather than homes. But it is not true for all cultures; many societies attach considerable religious meaning to ^fbe h°^me. For ^examP^le JewM. ^families co-tat certain religious services in their home, in the Chinese traditional house, altars for various gods appeared throughout the house, and the main room had ancestral altar for a certain ceremonies; a religious shrine is ever present in the Thai home; and a family temple is available in every Balinese Hindu house (Ngoerah, 1981). In Egypt the Moslem house the doorway is decorated with a verse from the Qu’ran, in ornamental character, to protect the house against evil (Tipple, 1994). ForAsian people, homes or ^bouses .re ,_oy ^respo°^slve <^o env^m»..,..! demands and also reflect a variety of cultural values included religion. The conversion of the individual or groups from one religion to another religion affected their environment such as villages and houses (Rapoport, 1967; Altman, 1984).

• 4.    TheconceptofAdaptation

In the Oxford Dictionary and Thesaurus (2001), the word adaptation means fit, adjust, alter, make s^uitab^{le, modif}y a°^d adapt t^o adjust tors t^o °^ew conditions. According to Bennett, (1976) the concept of adaptation is originally from biology, which has two meanings: firstly genetic evolutionary, which ^concerOS ^{fbe fe}ed^back_ι ^fro^{m inferacflo}OS wdh ^fbe C⁰™⁰"^{1 a}°d to.udy beht™∙°^fta °^rga°^ism during its live-span that will permit the organism to ^cope^^{ith eo}''.^iro“^al ⅛∙^ors. ⁱo a^». h^e ttod tat ¹o ta sc∞^c<. ^of lmm_a° Mi™, ^fbe concept of adaptation is derived from the biological meaning. Adaptation is also a key concept in two versions of system theory such as biological and behavioural and social. In social contexts, adaptive behaviour can be seen as innovative, change seeking, novelty-producing, and toleration. “The process of iooovatioo is as the basic of cultural c.^h,"*e^-.$^0“ q^uoκ r .^{Be r,}"" ^1976::' ^BeOOett (1⁹⁷⁶∣ e^mpha^s1^se₁d ta. p^{eople a gr}o^up^{s or} otaVKlto ctadadairtaby^fl°d¹⁰g^oewsolut^l°^os “O™ ^{or ol}d^prob^lems, ^orbys^lmply^lear^lrlogo hv^e with the existing situation and worrying less about it or by adjusting other behaviours to the prevailing reality.

Enrinrnirrar^thtjrtedhrn

According to Rapoport (1969), Altman and Chemers (1989), io certain societies there is a strong relationship between religion and eoviroomeot. The role of religioo and belief systems will affect the phy^{slcal eovlro}O^meo1 mn⁰^. Ita ^ f^orm, shape ^{aod des}ι^g0 are ta ^res^ult °^f tata °^f the cultural core such as religion, belief, life style, ^cla0 ^taroc a°d (^roupl°∣. Rawon tato iodicates that houses, settlements and landscape are products of the same cultural core. When various ^grou^ps of ^peoF^les. have ^{come l}°t^{o coo1},c¹ wdh another, ideas and fradi1ioos have been exchanged as conversions. For example, conversion from animist to Hindu, Hindu to Chris1iaoi1y, and to another religioo, needs to suit their eoviroomeot base on their desire (Mastra, 1986). In this case, people are able to ‘reject’, ‘adopt’ or ‘accept’ and ‘adapt’ the previous culture. When individuals or groups undergo culture change, adaptatioo in a certain O^ovttoOm^{eot a}°^d °o°^-o^0Vtro⁰me0¹ elemeta are needed to maiotaio the ancestors heritage culture and to establish a new Ideotity.

• 5.    Conclusion

Culture is complex things Ih_at comprises o^f belief..knowledge, yates, customs bdiavmui-s, artefacts, morals. and habits obtained by man as a member of society, furthermore it is the man-made part of the human environment. The concept of culture reflects sets of things from abstract principles such as ways ofbehaving and relating to the physical environment. Culture is affected by the environmental demands, and also culture influences ^what ^peop⅛ do tem-d t^he ei—ern. Ueste “''“o™'* Cte^ure teo m^fte^nces p^eop^le m shaping built environment. The environments and ' '^'i' afe ^liuked .of ^pe^ople .nd various psychological processes, which consists of mental and behavioural activities. Physical environment affects the psychological processes. Behaviour activities concern what people do and how they act

in relation to the environment. Cultural-contact produces cultural change and contact between the local culture and another culture resulted contextualization with connotations and meanings of adaptation, accommodation, actualisation, indigenisation, inculturation, incarnation, intercultural communication. The role of religion and belief systems affected the physical environment -m^.!!.? biiddmgtemshape and des⅛,r “^the "^sult off"»» »f'1“ ^c" »^re such as religion, belief, life style, clan structure and grouping. Various groups of peoples have come into contact ^with a,teh», teased UadMons have bee,, eχchaⁿg^ed as conveys. In tea ease, _pcpl. are able to reject, adopt or accept and adapt the previous o^rn^ew^Cu^l'u^re.W⅛^enind^ividua^lso^rg^roups^und^ergo culture change, adaptation in a certain environment and non-environment elements are needed.

References

Adams,DanielJ. 1989. CrossCulturalTheology: WestemRcflectionsinAsia. JohnKnoxPress, Atlanta.

Altman, I and Chemers, M. 1984. Culture andEnvironment. Brooks/Scole Publishing Company, Montery.

Baasland, E. 1997. The Contextualization witness of the Apostles. Lausanne Committee for World Evangelization. http://lausanne.gospelcom.net/wemag/0index.html 26/04/2005.

Bennet, W.John. 1976. The Ecological transition: Cultural Anthropology andhjan adaptation. Pergamon ^presslnc,U^κ                                      _____________________

Cooper,Robert.2001. AMatterofCulture .JournalCulturalfaluesISSN 1362-5179,Vo.5No.2,April2001 „    pp∙^163--≡

Covarrubias, Miguel. 1976. IslandofBali. in Alfred A. Knopf. 1937. Oxford University Press. Reprinted in

„ S⅛≈

Cuang, D.J. 2004. Embodying Christianity Beyond Cultures. Article Culture and Gospel ofKaleochurch.

January, 2004. http://www.djchuang.com/doc/embodychrist.htm 26/08/2006

Herskovits, M.J. 1941. The Myth ofthe Negro Past. Beacon Press, Boston.

Hesselgrave, J.David and Rommen, Edward. 2000. Contextualization. Meanings, Methods, and Models. William Carey Library, California.

Hiebert, P.G. 1997. Convertion and Worldview Transformation. International Journal ofFrontier Mission, ^v°^l,l⁴2Apr^-junel957 ^                  '         _   __________________

Hill, Jonathan. 2001. TheUse ofArchitects Journal UrbanStudies, Vol.38,No.2, 351-356,2001.

Hillier, Bill and Hanson, Julienne. 1984. The Social Logic ofSpace. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Itellson, W.Hetal. 1974. IntroductiontoEnvironmentalPsycology. Holt,Rinehart& Winston,New York.

Johnson, T. M. 1997. Contextualization: aNew-OldIdea. Lausanne Committee for World Evangelization.

.....⅛⅛≡n∞^          ............

Kluckhohn, F.R. 1951. Dominant and variant value orientations. In C. Kluckhohn, H. Murray &D.M.

Scheider (Eds). Personality in Nature, society, and Culture. Knopf, NewYork.

Kuntjaraningrat. 1987. Kebudayaan,MentalitasdanPembangunan. Gramedia:Jakarta

Liddle.W. 1990. Cultural River State University Iowa, Iowa .

Ma, J.C. 2000. Santuala: A Case ofPantecostal Syncretism. Asian Journal ofPantecostal Studies 3/1/2000

MacDonald. 2003. Gods, Beliefs and Ceremonies. Anness Publishing, London.

Mastra, I Wayan. 1978. “A Contextualized Church: The Bali Experinece. The Gereja Protestan di Bali responds to the Gospel”. in Taber, R.Charles (ed.). A Dialogue on Contextualization. Gospel in Context. Vol.1 No.2 April 1978.

McGonigle, T. D., Quigley J.F. 1988. “AHistory cfthe Christian Tradition: From its Jewish Origins to the

„   R^eo^m_τ^a!∞ⁿ. "^Pau'^is^   Y^ort.

Ngoerah,GdeIGst.Ngurah. 1981. ArsitetturTraditionalBali LaporanPenelitianlnventarisasiPola-Pola Dasar. Lembaga Penerbitan Universitas Hasanuddin, Ujung Pandang.

Nicholls,B.J. 1979. Contextualization: A TheoryofGospelandCulture. Inter-Varsity,DownersGrave.

Niebuhr, H.R. 1951. Crist and Culture. Harper&Row Publisher, New Yort.

Oddie. G.A. 2003. Constructing “Hinduism”: The Impact of the Protestant Missionaries Movement on Hindu Self-Understanding. in R.E. Frytenberg (ed.) Christians and Missionaries in India. Routledge C“^L“^don-

Oliver, P. 2003. Dwelling The VernacularHouse World Wide. Phaidon Press Limited, London.

Rapoport, A. 2005. Culture, Architecture, andDesign. Locte Science Publishing Company. Inc, Illinois.

Rapoport, A. 1994. Thirty Three Papers in Environment-Behaviour Research: Includes the Complete

^By-g-^p;^y o^fthe A^uthor∖W₀^rkiⁿprim. ttta MenMtad ^ ^castte upon ^y_l ^e .

Rapoport, A and Hardie. 1991. Culture Change analysis: Core Concept of Housing for the Tsuwana in Tipple A. Graham and Willis Kenneth G (eds). Housing thepoor in the Developing World. Method of Analysis, CaseStudiesandPolicy. London:Routledge.36-61

Rapoport,A. 1990. SystemofActivitiesandSystemofSettings inKent, Susan(ed) Domestic Architecture and the Use of Space. An Interdisciplinary cross-cultural Study. Cambridge University Press,

• „    ^Cam“*e.’^-2°.

Rapoport, A. 1987. Development, Cultural Change and Supportive Design. Habitat International, New

• -   ^ya.

Rapoport, A. 1983. Environmental Quality MetropolitantArea & Traditional Settlement . Habitat

„    ^Interⁿ‘“!!n‘^lIAU^-4I^pU!-⁶³

Rapoport, A. 1970. The Study of Spatial Quality Journal of Aesthetic Education, Vol.4, No 4 (October) pp.81-96,reprinted in ArchitecturalQuarterly, Vol.19,No.1,1978.pp. 45-50.

Rapopo₁t,A. 1969 ^h°→^                              .........

Rapoport, A. 1973a. Some Thoughts on the Methodology of Man-Environment Studies . International Journal ofEnvironmentalStudies. Vol.4, pp.135-140.

Rapoport, A. 1973b. “Some Perspectives on Human Use and Organisation of Space”. Architectural

^Assori»^t»ⁿ_rieu»r^t5^ri^Vo.^L5-^N“.3^,pp;^28-37.

Sastrowardoyo,R.S. 1987. TraditionalArchitectureofBali .Seminarpaper

Schreiter, R.J. 1996. RancangBangun Teologi Lokal. BPK Gunung Mulia, Jatarta.

Siwu, A.D.Richard. 1996. Misi Dalam Pandangan Ekumenikal Dan Evangelikal Asia 1910-1961-1991.

• „    .. p^TBPK„GU"U^ngMu!ia:J^atal1a.

Soothdeo, P. 1997. Issues in Contextualisation. Lausanne Committee for World Evangelization. http:// lausanne.gospelcom.net/wemag/0index.html 28/04/2005

Sugden, Chris. 1997. Seeking the Asian Face of Jesus. The Practice and Theology of Christian Social

• „    .  WⁱU"^n,n^^^       ^C*-¹⁹?⁶-.^^,.⁰^^;.....            ........

Sutanada, I Ketut. 1999. Kajian tentang temanfaatan tebijatan GKPB dalam penggunaan arsitettur Bali sebagai upaya tontettualisasi’ Unpublished dissertation University ofSatya Wacana Salatiga Central Java.

Tanner, K. 1997. Theories ofCulture a New Agendafor Theology. Augsburg Foertress, Minneapolis.

The Holy Bible New International Version. 1992. The Bath Press. Great Britain.

Tipple, A.G (et al). 1994. House and Dwelling, Family and Household. Towards Defining Housing Units in ^we^stA^fr^^^

Titiev, Mischa. 1959. Cultural Anthropology. NewYort.

• 3 *^*.^. ^o^                _____________

Witipedia. 2006. Origin belief. http://www.reference.com/browse/witi/ Originbelief, 10/01/2006

Williams, M.S. 2005. Bwaya as Spirit-being: Filipino Islam and the Supernatural. Journal of Asian Missions. Vol.7.pp. 119-131

287