The “roof tile standardization” program presented by President Prabowo Subianto during the 2026 National Coordination Meeting of the Central and Regional Governments has drawn mixed responses from academics. One such response came from a lecturer at the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Gadjah Mada (FT UGM), Dr. Ashar Saputra, who argued that the discourse needs to be examined more thoroughly.
According to Dr. Saputra, when assessing the use of roofing materials, particularly clay tiles and metal sheets, at least three key aspects must be considered: technical performance, socio-cultural factors, and sustainability. These three aspects, he emphasized, cannot be separated in development policy planning.
“I am not commenting directly on the roof tile standardization program itself, but rather viewing it through those three perspectives. Each roofing material carries different consequences,” he said on Thursday (Feb. 5).
From a technical standpoint, Dr. Saputra explained that clay tiles and metal roofing have distinct performance and physical properties. Metal roofing comes in sheet form, allowing it to be used on roofs with low slopes, even as low as around 5 percent, without a high risk of leakage. In contrast, clay tiles require a certain roof pitch to function safely.
“Clay tiles are generally only safe to use at slopes above 30 percent. This already shows a fairly fundamental technical difference,” he explained.
In addition, differences in material weight are another critical factor that must be taken into account. Clay, ceramic, and concrete tiles are generally heavier than metal roofing. As a result, roof structures and buildings must be designed to be stronger.
“If the load is heavy, the structure must be able to support it. During an earthquake, greater mass also increases risk if the structure is not properly designed,” he said.
On the other hand, relatively lightweight metal roofing also carries its own risks, particularly during strong winds. For this reason, Dr. Saputra stressed that no material is entirely risk-free, as each has its own advantages and disadvantages.
Another technical aspect highlighted is the ability of roofing materials to respond to heat. Heavier clay tiles tend to perform better at reducing heat, making indoor temperatures feel cooler. However, this condition is not always ideal for all regions.
“In colder mountainous areas, houses actually need to harvest solar heat so that the interior stays warm. In such cases, using metal roofing can be a more suitable option,” he said.
Beyond technical considerations, Dr. Saputra emphasized that socio-cultural aspects must not be overlooked. Indonesia’s diverse ethnic groups, cultures, and beliefs shape the form and materials of residential buildings.
He noted that in some regions, there are still beliefs that living in materials derived from the earth is inappropriate for living beings. Such beliefs lead communities to choose roofing materials other than clay tiles.
“This is not about technical performance or aesthetics, but about socio-cultural beliefs. Things like this cannot be ignored or standardized,” he explained.
The design of traditional houses is also an important consideration. Several traditional houses, such as the Rumah Gadang in West Sumatra, the Tongkonan in Toraja, and traditional houses in Nias and Papua, have distinctive roof forms. Historically, these forms allowed the use of flexible, easily shaped materials such as palm fiber or wooden shingles.
“If heavy and rigid clay tiles are used, this would pose a significant challenge and potentially eliminate the original character of traditional buildings,” Dr. Saputra said.
The third aspect he highlighted is sustainability. In building materials science, material selection should consider the energy required from production through to use.
“We need to calculate how much energy is required and how many emissions are generated to produce a material. The use of clay tiles is not necessarily always more energy-efficient than metal roofing, or vice versa,” he explained.
Dr. Saputra also noted the need for clarity regarding the policy’s main objective: whether it focuses on roof form, material type, or aesthetics in general. Currently, he said, various metal-based materials are available that resemble clay tiles in shape and offer a neater appearance.
“If the goal is aesthetics, there are actually many material alternatives. The question is whether what is being pursued is the material, the form, or the architectural appearance,” he said.
In closing, Dr. Saputra emphasized that policies related to building materials should not be implemented uniformly across all regions of Indonesia. Given the country’s diverse geographic conditions, cultures, and economic capacities, a flexible approach is considered more appropriate.
“Indonesia is diverse. Forcing everyone to follow a single option is not in line with the spirit of Bhinneka Tunggal Ika. Communities should be positioned as subjects, not merely objects of development,” he concluded.
Author: Diyana Khairunnisa
Editor: Gusti Grehenson
Post-editor: Jasmine Ferdian
Photographs: Backpackerjakarta and Ceritapadang