Sustainable Growth And Sophistication In Both Residential And Commercial Designs: Principles To Establish Environmentally Friendly And Aesthetically Pleasing Environments
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63682/jns.v13i1.7163Keywords:
Sustainable ecology, ecological health, environmentally viable, visually pleasingAbstract
Finding ways to make building exteriors and interiors more aesthetically pleasing and environmentally friendly is the primary goal of this study. The strategies that are the subject of this study are those that aim to produce landscapes that are both aesthetically beautiful and ecologically sustainable. The design community is under increasing pressure to create visually beautiful environments with a smaller ecological footprint as people become more concerned about environmental issues. This problem is caused by the design technique, the materials used, and the amount of energy. Important concepts like biophilic design and cradle-to-cradle principles are discussed, in addition to sustainable materials and energy-efficient technology. The article goes even further, exploring the challenges of obtaining ecologically beneficial materials as well as the perceived costs of sustainable design. Looking at successful case studies and current trends, the initiative aims to provide designers practical advice on how to integrate sustainability with beauty. To be environmentally friendly, a design doesn't have to be ugly. In fact, sustainable design has the potential to spark fresh ideas for aesthetically pleasing and practically useful designs. Adding to the ongoing discussion on sustainable design, this study anticipates the future of interior and exterior design in a more environmentally aware society. A vital component of contemporary architecture and city planning is sustainable development in both interior and outdoor design, which aims to balance ecological consciousness with a focus on form. In order to build environments that are both aesthetically pleasing and ecologically sustainable, this research investigates the use of biophilic design concepts, energy-efficient technology, and environmentally friendly materials
Downloads
Metrics
References
Dong, Y.; Ng, S.T.; Liu, P. A comprehensive analysis towards benchmarking of life cycle assessment of buildings based onsystematic review. Build. Environ. 2021,204, 108162.
Ferreira, A.; Pinheiro, M.D.; Brito, J.; Mateus, R. A critical analysis of LEED, BREEAM and DGNB as sustainability assessment methods for retail buildings. J. Build. Eng. 2023, 66, 105825.
Hasik, V.; Escott, E.; Bates, R.; Carlisle, S.; Faircloth, B.; Bilec, M.M. Comparative whole-building life cycle assessment of renovation and new construction. Build. Environ. 2019,161, 106218.
Huang, B.; Gao, X.; Xu, X.; Song, J.; Geng, Y.; Sarkis, J.; Fishman, T.; Kua, H.; Nakatani, J. A life cycle thinking framework tomitigate the environmental impact of building materials. One Earth 2020, 3, 564–573.
Kong, M.; Lee, M.; Kang, H.; Hong, T. Development of a framework for evaluating the contents and usability of the building lifecycle assessment tool. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021,150, 111475.
Le, D.-L.; Nguyen, T.-Q.; Huu, K.D. Life cycle carbon dioxide emissions assessment in the design phase: A case of a greenbuilding in Vietnam. Eng. J. 2021, 25, 121–133.
Mengist, W.; Soromessa, T.; Legese, G. Method for conducting systematic literature review and meta-analysis for environmental science research. MethodsX 2020, 7, 100777.
Mohsen, M.S.; Matarneh, R. exploring the interior designers’ attitudes toward sustainable interior design practices: The case of Jordan. Sustainability 2023, 15, 14491.
Sahlol, D.G.; Elbeltagi, E.; Elzoughiby, M.; Abd Elrahman, M. Sustainable building materials assessment and selection usingsystem dynamics. J. Build. Eng. 2021, 35, 101978.
Wang, Z.; Liu, Y.; Shen, S. Review on building life cycle assessment from the perspective of structural design. J. Asian Archit.Build. Eng. 2021, 20, 689–705.
Wenzlaff, J.; Page, M.; Moher, D. PNS154 the PRISMA 2020 statement: Development of and key changes in an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Value Health 2020, 23, S312–S313.
Wijesooriya, N.; Brambilla, A. Bridging biophilic design and environmentally sustainable design: A critical review. J. Clean. Prod. 2021,283, 124591.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
Terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
