Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
ARSNET

Articles

Vol. 5 No. 2 (2025)

Reconnecting the wetlands through non-discrete architecture

DOI
https://doi.org/10.7454/arsnet.v5i2.159
Published
2025-10-31
Article downloads
0
Submitted
2025-07-17
Accepted
2025-10-15

Abstract

This design study explores non-discrete architecture as a form of architecture that connects nature and the built environment. Architecture often separates itself and its users from the natural setting, leading to environmental neglect and the gradual loss of
the natural environment. The idea of non-discrete architecture focuses on how the relationship between humans and nature can be reconstructed by creating spatial layers that can actively participate in living processes. This study focuses on the neglected wetland environment in Banjarmasin, South Kalimantan. The inquiry begins by documenting the various experiences of nature in the area, from the abundance presence of wilderness and the dynamic water reflections of the wetlands. The study explores how such experience is captured through spatial boundaries such as roof structures and floor gaps. This study develops a form of low-tech pavilion that reconsiders the boundaries and how it is situated amidst the wetland landscapes. The project aims to bring a connection between the inside and the outside and captures the landscape dynamics, creating an animated interior of the space. In doing so, it fosters awareness of environmental beauty and renews appreciation for the wetland architecture that has been neglected.

References

  1. Ashraf, K. (2012). Reading the wind and weather: The meteorological architecture of Studio Mumbai. Architectural Design, 82(6), 78–83. https://doi.org/10.1002/ad.1498

  2. Atmodiwirjo, P., & Yatmo, Y. A. (2021). Animated Interior. Interiority, 4(2), 135–138. https://doi.org/10.7454/in.v4i2.176

  3. Aulia ur Rahman Studio. (2025, July 12). Water caustic effect in architecture [Video]. Youtube. https://youtu.be/eH7PUh8qcng

  4. Bacchetta, E., Charbon, A., Grossenbacher, L., & Nadas, E. (2023). Reed: Phragmites Australis. Material Cultures. https://materialcultures.org/eth-reed/

  5. Baker, L. (2014). Temporary architecture. Braun.

  6. Bevan, R. (2015). In the pursuit of pleasure: The not so fleeting life of the pavilion and its ilk. Architectural Design, 85(3), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.1002/ad.1896

  7. Cannon, M., & Gianvanni, M. (2013). Quit the grey limbo and return to paradise. Architectural Design, 83(3), 68–73. https://doi.org/10.1002/ad.1592

  8. Ching, F. D. K. (2019). Building construction illustrated (6th ed.). Wiley.

  9. Convention on Wetlands. (2025). Global wetland outlook 2025: Valuing, conserving, restoring and financing wetlands. https://doi.org/10.69556/GWO-2025-eng

  10. Cordua, C. H. (2015). Conviction into tectonics: The work of Rintala Eggertsson. Architectural Design, 85(2), 76–81. https://doi.org/10.1002/ad.1879

  11. Davidova, M., & Rakova, D. (2018). Biodiversity and climate change adaptation through non-discrete architectural spaces and architectures: Systematic approach to traditions for sustainable futures. FormAkademisk - Forskningstidsskrift for Design Og Designdidaktikk, 11(4), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.7577/formakademisk.2287

  12. Enia, M., & Martella, F. (2019). Reducing architecture: Doing almost nothing as a city-making strategy in 21st century architecture. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 8(2), 154–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2019.01.006

  13. Fowles, E. (2021, July 15). Make low-tech our mantra and design clean and simple. The RIBA Journal. https://www.ribaj.com/intelligence/low-tech-reset-climate-emergency-feilden-fowles

  14. Guenther, R. (2017). Transforming hospitals: Building restorative healthcare. Architectural Design, 87(2), 128–133. https://doi.org/10.1002/ad.2162

  15. Hadinata, I. Y. (2021). Transformasi ruang rawa Kota Banjarmasin [Transforming the swamp in Banjarmasin]. Sustainable, Planning and Culture (SPACE): Jurnal Perencanaan Wilayah dan Kota, 3(1), 33–40. https://doi.org/10.32795/space.v3i1.1727

  16. Haselsteiner, E. (2023). Robust architecture. Low-tech design. Detail Architecture.

  17. Heidegger, M. (1971). Poetry, language, thought (A. Hofstadter, Trans.). Harper & Row.

  18. Hensel, M. (2013). Performance‐oriented architecture: Rethinking architectural design and the built environment. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118640630.ch3

  19. Hensel, M., & Turko, J. P. (2015). Grounds and envelopes: Reshaping architecture and the built environment. Routledge.

  20. Jain, N., & Carpay, S. (2020, December 8). Urban wetlands for cooler and climate-proof cities. Wetlands International. https://www.wetlands.org/publication/urban-wetlands-for-cooler-and-climate-proof-cities

  21. Joy, R. (2012). Identity through the grounding of experience in place. Architectural Design, 82(6), 40–45. https://doi.org/10.1002/ad.1491

  22. Kellert, S. R. (2018). Nature by design: The practice of biophilic design. Yale University Press.

  23. Kite, S. (2023). 'In the womb yet out‐of‐doors': Penumbra and the spaces in‐between. Architectural Design, 93(4), 30–37. https://doi.org/10.1002/ad.2951

  24. Langenheim, N., & Yu, K. (2023). The Mega‐Eco‐38 Garden City: Stories of rewilding and ecodystopia. Architectural Design, 93(1), 38–45. https://doi.org/10.1002/ad.2892

  25. Le Festival des Cabanes. (n.d.). Introduction. https://www.lefestivaldescabanes.com/en/introduction

  26. Material Cultures, & Bauhaus Earth. (2023). Wetlands and construction: An opportunity for Berlin-Brandenburg. 

  27. Mathur, A., & da Cunha, D. (2020). Wetness is everywhere: Why do we see water somewhere? Journal of Architectural Education, 74(1), 139–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/10464883.2020.1693843

  28. Meninato, P. (2023). Theory follows photography: The evolving gaze of Denise Scott Brown. Interiority, 6(1), 5–20. https://doi.org/10.7454/in.v6i1.233

  29. Monet, C. (1919). Water lilies [Painting]. The Met Museum, New York, NY, United States. https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/438008

  30. Musfy, K., Sosa, M., & Ahmad, L. (2021). The public interior space within Louvre Abu Dhabi Dome: A visual reflection. Interiority, 4(2), 159–180. https://doi.org/10.7454/in.v4i2.154

  31. Ni'mah, L., Anshari, M. A., Saputra, H. A., Rahmadi, A., & Fitriati, U. (2019). Utilization of Parupuk plants (Phragmites Karka) to reduce mercury levels in waters former of diamond and golden mining. MATEC Web of Conferences, 280, Article 05012. https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201928005012

  32. Nute, K. (2016). The presence of the weather. Architectural Design, 86(1), 66–73. https://doi.org/10.1002/ad.2003

  33. Nyssa, A. R., Susanto, D., & Panjaitan, T. H. (2021). Sustainable construction of wetland stilt house in Indonesia. In T. Kang & Y. Lee (Eds.), Proceedings of 2021 4th International Conference on Civil Engineering and Architecture (pp. 625–632). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-6932-3_54

  34. Paramita, K. D., & Yatmo, Y. A. (2023). Thinking low-tech: Promoting local practices in design studio. Jurnal Kejuruteraan, si6(1), 103–111. https://doi.org/10.17576/jkukm-2023-si6(1)-10

  35. Paramita, K. D., Atmodiwirjo, P., & Sinuraibhan, S. (2022). Learning from contextual material practices in architecture: Exploring nature-based materials in Indonesia and Thailand. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1098(1), Article 012040. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1098/1/012040

  36. Ramella, A. (2019, January 2). Belonging - Glenn Murcutt [Video]. Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYEbgU7xZHA&t=1058s

  37. Ramsar. (2021). Wetlands and carbon capture. https://www.ramsar.org/sites/default/files/ramsar_50_factsheet_carbon_capture_english_as_v7.pdf

  38. Römer, A., & Aït‐Sidhoum, N. (2013). Low‐tech transgression: The interventional work of EXYZT. Architectural Design, 83(6), 66–69. https://doi.org/10.1002/ad.1676

  39. Salihbegovic, A., & Salihbegovic, A. (2020). Natural materials in contemporary low-tech architecture. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 960(4), Article 042012. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/960/4/042012

  40. Schneekloth, L. H. (2006). Unruly and robust: An abandoned industrial river. In Q. Stevens (Ed.), Loose space: Possibility and diversity in urban life (pp. 253–270). Routledge.

  41. Thiis-Evensen, T. (1987). Archetypes in architecture. Universitetsforlaget. https://doi.org/10.18261/9788215046419-2020-5

  42. Titman, M. (2013). Dualism is dead; long live the pastoral. Architectural Design, 83(3), 14–19. https://doi.org/10.1002/ad.1584

  43. Todd, A. (2020). Plant consciousness: Towards an architecture of expanded kinship. Architectural Design, 90(6), 100–109. https://doi.org/10.1002/ad.2638

  44. Utzon, J. (1962). Platforms and plateaus: Ideas of a Danish architect. Zodiac, 10, 113–140.

  45. van Schaik, L. (2015a). Pavilions, pop‐ups and parasols: Are they platforms for change? Architectural Design, 85(3), 8–15. https://doi.org/10.1002/ad.1895

  46. van Schaik, L. (2015b). Practical poetics in architecture. John Wiley & Sons.

  47. Watson, J. (2019). Lo—TEK: Design by radical indigenism. Taschen.

  48. Weedbusters. (n.d.). Phragmites. https://www.weedbusters.org.nz/what-are-weeds/weed-list/phragmites/

  49. Wigglesworth, S., & Till, J. (1998). The everyday and architecture: 134 (Architectural Design). John Wiley & Sons.

  50. Yodsurang, P., Uekita, Y., & Shimizu, I. (2022). Water-based settlement and the loss of community water resilience. Interiority, 5(2), 179–196. https://doi.org/10.7454/in.v5i2.210

  51. Yunandar, Y. Z. (2014). Model instalasi biofilter dengan pemanfaatan parupuk (Phragmites karka) dan kiambang (Salvinia molesta) [Biofilter installation model with the utilisation of parupuk (Phragmites karka) and kiambang (Salvinia molesta)]. Jurnal Bumi Lestari, 14(1), 53–62. https://jurnal.harianregional.com/blje/full-11244

  52. Zhang, R., & Wang, S. (2022). Experiencing structure: Structural design as the making of a spatial artistic expression. In M. F. Hvejsel & P. J. S. Cruz (Eds.), Structures and architecture. A viable urban perspective? (pp. 1161–1168). CRC Press.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.