Aldila Nia Widya Pangestika – 40030218060026

Izzati Afina RIsahan – 40030218060051

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305040104

Review of the sustainable built environment in 1998–2015

Article · April 2016

DOI: 10.3846/2029882X.2016.1189363

CITATIONS
READS
6
153

2 authors, including:

Oleg Kapliński
Poznan University of Technology
81 PUBLICATIONS 699 CITATIONS

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Architect and the Paradigms of Sustainable Development: A Review of Dilemmas. Sustainability, 2018, vol. 10 | Special Issue, 1-15, DOI: 10.3390/su10010100 View
project

innovations View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Oleg Kapliński on 07 February 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 ENGINEERING STRUCTURES AND TECHNOLOGIES
ISSN 2029-882X /eISSN 2029-8838
2016 8(2): 41–
51

doi:10.3846/2029882X.2016.1189363

REVIEW OF THE SUSTAINABLE BUILT ENVIRONMENT IN 1998–2015

Ieva UBARTE, Oleg KAPLINSKI

a
Research Institute of Smart Building Technologies, Faculty of Civil Engineering,
Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Saulėtekio al. 11, LT-10223, Vilnius, Lithuania
b
Faculty of Architecture, Poznań University of Technology, Nieszawska 13C, 60-965 Poznań, Poland
Received 22 April 2016; accepted 10 May 2016
Abstract. A city is a complex physical and social phenomenon that is under constant development and un-
dergoes quantitative and qualitative changes. The welfare of the whole society depends on the sustainability
of the built environment. The article presents a review of the literature on the sustainable built environment,
which was made on the basis of the Thomson Reuters Web of Science Core Collection database. The anal-
ysed articles were published between 1998 and 2015. The analysis of the number of publications was made
according to years of publication, countries, research areas and the Web of Science categories. 31 article
and review document type were selected for a detailed analysis by three key Web of Science categories:
environ- mental science, environmental studies, and construction and building technology.
Keywords: sustainable built environment, environmental science, environmental studies, construction and
building technology, literature review.

Introduction
changes. The welfare of the entire society depends on
The built environment – human-modified places such the sustainability of the urban development (Zavad-
as homes, schools, workplaces, parks, industrial skas et al. 2007). The sustainable development is be-
areas, farms, roads and highways – is our most coming a dominating principle in planning a new and
important habitat (Srinivasan et al. 2003). It includes compact format of a city residential area. The current
all of the physical parts of where we live and work concept of impossibility to live in such residential
(e.g., homes, buildings, streets, open spaces, and areas urges us to reconsider our present practice of
infrastructure) (Stanhope 2012). In achieving urban planning. Acceptance of new and innovative
sustainable develop- ment, the built industry is a key ideas in the process of urban planning is a new
player (De Meester et al. 2009) because the built challenge for the development of the sustainable built
environment is respon- sible for the significant use of environment (Zavadskas, Antucheviciene 2006;
final energy (62%) and is a major source of Viteikiene, Zavads- kas 2007; Kaklauskas et al.
greenhouse gas emissions (55%) (Anderson et al. 2015).
2015). The dimension of the problem under considera-
A constructive interplay between three main tion grows when life cycle analysis needs are taken
components (the environment, economics and society) into consideration. Examples of presenting this
is the backbone of the concept of the sustainable problem area from the viewpoint of life cycle have
devel- opment (Štreimikienė et al. 2014). A city is a been pre- sented in (Kaklauskas et al. 2015; Dziadosz
complex physical and social phenomenon that is et al. 2015).
under constant development. It undergoes quantitative
An important issue is the search for an adequate
and qualitative
set of instruments to solve the environment – eco-

Corresponding author:
O. Kaplinski E-mail: oleg.kaplinski@put.poznan.pl
Copyright © 2016 Vilnius Gediminas Technical University (VGTU) Press
http://www.tandfonline.com/TESN 41
42 I. Ubarte, O. Kaplinski. Review of the sustainable built environment in 1998–
2015 distributed
nomics – society triad (c.f. Antucheviciene et al.
2015; Kaklauskas, Zavadskas 2012; Kaklauskas et al.
2014; Kapliński, Tupenaite 2011). One of the methods
under consideration is (MCDA) - the multi-criteria
decision method.
Researchers use various MCDM methods to
analyse the sustainable built environment. Zavads-
kas et al. (2014) gave an overview of
MCDM/MADM methods, which demonstrated that
9.26% of MCDM methods had been used in the
environmental science, in the area of ecology (mostly
in relation to energy fuels, where 16.67% of the
methods had been used) (Zavadskas et al. 2014).
Based on the review by Zavad- skas et al. (2016),
regarding the application of hybrid multiple-criteria
decision-making methods in engi- neering, the most
popular methodological approach- es were
combinations of crisp AHP with TOPSIS or ANP
with TOPSIS, as well as their combinations in a fuzzy
environment. In the analysis of issues pertain- ing to
sustainable energy and renewable energy, the most
popular methods were AHP, VIKOR and ANP,
TOPSIS and PROMETHEE, etc. as well as integrated
methods (Mardani et al. 2015; Kaplinski et al. 2014).
This article presents a review of the sustainable
built environment in 1998–2015, made on the basis of
the Web of Science Core Collection database. Aiming
to develop a healthy and safe environment, based on
the holistic approach in the face of the urbanisation
issues, it is especially important to focus on the sus-
tainable development with the help of the most up-to-
date methodologies, systems and solutions offered by
researchers.

1. Research methodology
In this paper, the literature related to the sustainable
built environment has been reviewed
comprehensively on the basis of papers referred in the
Thomson Reuters Web of Science Core Collection
database. Following a methodological analysis (Fig.
1), the analysis focused on articles published before
11 February 2016.
The review must be preceeded by the following
remark. As foreign authors use different terms,
namely “criterion” and “indicator”, the review was
made using the following combinations:
– sustainable built environment + criteria;
– sustainable built environment + indicators.
The presented research attempts to answer the
fol- lowing questions: (1) How are the papers
 Engineering Structures and Technologies, 2016, 8(2): 41– 43
51

Fig. 1. Procedure of the research

by the period of publishing? (2) How are the

papers distributed by country? (3) In what
research areas the sustainable built
environment was applied? (4) How were the
papers distributed by the Web of Science cat-
egories?
The assumed research methodology had
been ver- ified in the research (Zavadskas et
al. 2015a, 2015b).

2. Analysis of publications
2.1. Number of publications: by years and
countries
The Web of Science Core Collection database
(up to 11 February 2016) had 50 publications
with the term “cri- terion” that covered all of
the document types, includ- ing research
articles, reviews, proceedings papers, and
other documents. The analysis of the search
using the keyword “indicator” resulted in 59
publications that covered all of the document
types, including research articles, reviews,
proceedings papers, and other docu- ments
(Table 1).
The analysis of articles by years (1998–
2015) re- vealed that, compared to 2014, 2015
saw 57.13% more of articles on criteria of the
sustainable built environ- ment and 66.67%
more of articles on indicators of the
sustainable built environment. The
comparison is pre- sented in the graph in
Figure 2. Besides, 2016 already has one
article on criteria of the sustainable built en-
 Table 1. Publications on the topic of the sustainable built environment in the Web of Science database
Publications on criteria of the sustainable built environment Number of publications
All 59
Articles 45
Publications on indicators of the sustainable built environment
All 50
Articles 32

vironment. The comparison of the search results re-

2.2. Number of publications by a research
vealed that 14.03% more articles were publicised on area and the Web of Science categories
indicators of the sustainable built environment than
Publications on the sustainable built environment
on criteria of the sustainable built environment (i.e.
from the Web of Science Core Collection database
57 and 49 articles, respectively).
were also analysed by research area and the Web of
Most articles on the sustainable built environment
Science categories.
using the keyword “criterion” originated from
The analysis by research areas has revealed that
England. They comprise 15.1% of all articles (i.e. 8
most research efforts are concentrated on areas of
out of 53). 10 articles of 71 on the sustainable built
con- struction building technologies, engineering and
environment used the keyword “indicator”; they
envi- ronmental science ecology (Fig. 4). A similar
originated from the USA and amounted to 14.1%.
trend held true in the analysis of the Web of Science
The comparative graph is presented in Figure 3.
categories.

Number of articles by years

15
Number of articles by years (keyword: criteria)
10 Number of articles by years (keyword: indicators)

5
0
1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
2012 2014 2016

Fig. 2. Review of articles on the sustainable built environment by years using the keywords “criterion” and “indicator”

Number of articles by country

15
Number of articles by countries (keyword: criteria) Number of articles by countries (keyword: indicators)
10
5
0
Arab Emirates USA

Fig. 3. Review of articles on criteria and indicators of the sustainable built environment by country

Number of articles by research areas

20 Number of articles by research areas (keyword: criteria) Number of articles by research areas (keyword: indicators)
15
10
5
0
iodiversity conservation Business economics Agriculture

Fig. 4. Review of articles on criteria and indicators of the sustainable built environment by a research area
 Number of articles by web of science categories
Health care sciences services
Operations research management science
Sociology
Instruments instrumentation
Agronomy
Business finance
Engineering multidisciplinary
Computer science artificial
intelligence
Ecology
Engineering biomedical
Engineering industrial Imaging
science photographic technology
Materials science paper wood
Medicine general internal
Physics nuclear
Social sciences interdisciplinary
Economics
Management
Transportation Water
Istilah pembangunan berkelanjutan dapat digambarkan sebagai peningkatan kualitas hidup yang
resources Planning
memungkinkan orang untuk hidup dalam lingkungan yang sehat dan meningkatkan kondisi
development
sosial, ekonomi dan lingkungan untuk generasi sekarang dan mendatang. Peningkatan indikator
Urban studies
sosial, ekonomi dan lingkungan dari pembangunan berkelanjutan menarik perhatian pada industri
Environmental studies
konstruksi,
Architecture
yang merupakan sektor yang muncul secara global dan industri yang sangat aktif
(Ortizbuilding
Construction et al.0 2009). Untuk 5 alasan10ini, Ortiz et15al. (2009) 20 melakukan tinjauan analisis siklus hidup
(LCA) karena penerimaan internasionalnya yang luas sebagai sarana untuk peningkatan proses
technology Number of articles by web of science (keyword:
dan layanan lingkungan
criteria) Number of articles by web of science (keyword:
serta penggunaannya dalam penciptaan langkah-langkah yang mencegah dampak lingkungan
indicators)
yang merugikan dan terus meningkatkan kualitas hidup di lingkungan yang sehat. Menurut Lowe
et al. (2015),
Fig. 5. Review of articles on criteria perencanaan
and indicators komunitas
of the sustainable yang
built sehat, layak
environment by a huni danarea
research berkelanjutan melambangkan
hubungan penting antara kesehatan masyarakat, perencanaan kota dan lingkungan dengan
potensi manfaat tambahan di semua
The key Web of Science categories, sektor which also
improvement of social, economic and environmental
encom- pass research on the sustainable built
indicators of the sustainable development draws
environment, are: construction building technologies,
atten- tion to the construction industry, which is a
environmen- tal science and studies, and civil
globally emerging sector and a highly active industry
engineering (Fig. 5).
(Ortiz et al. 2009). For this reason, Ortiz et al.
Based on the analysis of articles by the Web of
(2009) under- took a review of the life cycle analysis
Science categories, there are 11.37% of articles using
(LCA) because of its broad international acceptance
the keyword “indicator” compared to those contain-
as a means to the improvement of environmental
ing the keyword “criterion”, or 123 and 103 articles,
processes and services as well as its use in the
respectively. Due to this, the following three areas of
creation of measures prevent- ing adverse
application were selected for further analysis:
environmental impacts and continuously enhancing
environ- mental science, environmental studies,
the quality of life in a healthy environment. According
construction and building technology.
to Lowe et al. (2015), planning healthy, live- able and
sustainable communities epitomizes the cru- cial
3. Analysis of the sustainable built environment in nexus between public health, urban planning and the
three key Web of Science categories:
environment with potential co-benefits across all
environmental science, environmental studies,
and construction and building technology sectors.
In their research, Ho et al. (2008) also underlined
The review of the sustainable built environment in ar- the importance of healthy and safe environment. They
eas of environmental science, environmental studies, looked at the relationship between development of a
and construction and building technology covered 31 healthy and safe environment and the density of multi-
articles and reviews selected from the Web of Science storey residential buildings in Hong Kong. Based on
Core Collection database. the cost-effective assessment schemes developed by
The term sustainable development can be de- Ho et al. (2008), which are used to evaluate the health
scribed as the enhancement of the quality of life that and safety performance, they found considerable
allows people to live in a healthy environment and variations in health and safety conditions across
improves social, economic and environmental con- buildings locat- ed within a single district. Most of the
ditions for the present and future generations. The
variations in the health and safety conditions
of the buildings were
attributed to differences in building management
graphic information system (GIS) tools combined
sys- tems rather than to the building design.
with a statistical treatment of urban and transport
Healthy environment of occupants in sustainable
criteria. The methodology allows modelling the use of
homes and buildings was analysed by Yu and Kim
building and transport energy at a city scale, as well
(2011) who observed the indoor air quality (IAQ).
as consider- ing the possible evolution of the city
The researchers made a review of Building
energy consump- tion and simulating the effects of
Environmental Assessment Schemes for Rating of
some strategies of urban renewal. In the area of
IAQ in Sustainable Buildings. According to the
construction and build- ing technologies, Adrian et al.
authors, there should be an IAQ management plan for
(2013) analysed the envelope performance of
any housing or build- ing developed, which should
commercial office buildings in Singapore. The
include a certification of the IAQ of the living spaces
researchers suggested a methodol- ogy for evaluating
prior to their occupancy. Additionally, low-emitting
the building performance of offices whilst taking into
materials should be used in new buildings.
account its surrounding morphol- ogy, using GIS as a
Foreign authors designed various frameworks for
platform for the integration with an urban climatic
the assessment of the sustainable built environment
assessment tool.
(Björnberg 2009; Bentivegna et al. 2002; Morrissey
The construction industry, therefore, faces certain
et al. 2012; Siew 2015). For example, Björnberg
pressures to increase the sustainability of its practices
(2009) developed a conceptual framework for the
reflected in the development of stringent regulations
assessment of environmental policy goals, which was
and environmental assessment methods, designed to
empirically tested against the Swedish environmental
mitigate such negative impacts (Alyami et al. 2015).
quality ob- jective “a good built environment”. The
Alyami et al. (2015) proposed to customize an adapt-
researcher uses a new term “a good built
ed weighting system that prioritizes the categories of
environment”, which is de- fined as 25 indicators
the Saudi environmental assessment method (SEAM).
focusing on different aspects of the urban
The research methodology involves the use of the an-
environment, such as the level of benzene in the air,
alytic hierarchy process (AHP). The results revealed
the number of homes with dampness and mould, and
that well-known environmental assessment methods
the level of radon in apartment build- ings.
are not fully applicable to the built environment of
Bentivegna et al. (2002) suggested the BEQUEST
Saudi Arabia, as reflected in the resulting categories,
framework for structuring information on the sustain-
criteria and weighting system of the SEAM. ALwaer
able urban development. This framework provides a
and Clements-Croome (2010) also suggested reach-
unique integrated representation of the scope and ex-
ing for the consensus-based model (Sustainable Built
tent of the subject that links together socio-economic
Environment Tool- SuBETool), which uses analytical
and technical dimensions as well as planning, prop-
hierarchical process (AHP) for multi-criteria decision-
erty, design and construction interests in time and
making. Their research demonstrated that the benefit
space. The Strategic Project Appraisal framework
of the new proposed model (SuBETool) is a ‘tool’ for
was developed by Morrissey et al. 2012, while Siew
a ‘comparative’ measurement rather than absolute
2015 proposed an alternative framework named the
measurement. It has the potential to draw useful les-
Green Building Fund for the assessment of
sons from current sustainability assessment methods
sustainable build- ing funds.
that could be used for strategically planned future of
Researchers Perales-Momparler et al. (2015),
sustainable intelligent buildings in order to improve
Reiter and Marique (2012), and Adrian et al. (2013)
a building’s performance and to deliver objective out-
suggested methodologies for assessment of the sus-
comes.
tainable built environment. Perales-Momparler et al.
Ding et al. (2015) developed the model referred
(2015) present an innovative methodology for ap-
to as the Trinity of Cities’ Sustainability from Spatial,
proaching the concept of the regenerative urban built
Logical and Time Dimensions (TCS–SLTD), which is
environment by focusing on municipal infrastructure
a useful tool for guiding the process for the selection
systems or sub-systems with a holistic view. Reiter
of Sustainable Development Indicators, and provides
and Marique (2012) proposed a methodology for
a conceptual framework for the holistic assessment
assessing residential energy uses for buildings and
of the sustainability of a city growth and expansion
transport at a city scale. This method is based on the
in developing countries. The model can assist urban
use of the geo-
planners and policy makers of developing countries
Within the period under analysis, many tools and
in integrated assessment of city sustainability, and in
assessment systems were developed (Ding et al.
the formulation of pragmatic and focused policies to
2015; Kim, Todorovic 2013; Bourdic et al. 2012;
shift cities towards more regenerative and sustainable
Borzac- chiello et al. 2010; Chen et al. 2010) for the
development trajectories (Ding et al. 2015). Conte
analysis of the sustainable built environment. Bourdic
and Monno (2012) also developed an integrated
et al. 2012 developed a system to improve the energy
building urban evaluation model based on the urban
efficiency and environmental footprint of cities.
matrix, which is a conceptualisation of the built
However, most of these tools are based on the scale of
environment as a socioecological system. This model,
the building (Bourdic et al. 2012). Most urban
as well as the one developed by Ding et al. (2015), is
stakeholders are now convinced that the building
also based on holistic approach. The model aims at
scale approach is insufficient: the scale of analysis
evaluating the sustainability of a building considering
should evolve from the building to the
it as an active entity contributing to the resilience of
neighbourhood, the district and the city. Gibberd
the urban ma- trix. Some holistic performance
(2015) developed the Built Environ- ment
indicators are used for evaluating such contribution
Sustainability Tool (BEST). BEST facilitates the
and expressing the reli- ability of a building. Models
evaluation of options which may be considered for
designed by other authors (Dur et al. 2014;
im- proving the sustainability capability of building–
Dizdaroglu 2015; Adrian et al. 2013) are presented in
neigh- bourhood combinations. BEST also provides
Table 2.
an alter- native to other green building rating tool
approaches.

Table 2. Summary of research on the sustainable built environment in three Web of Science categories: environmental science,
environmental studies, and construction and building technology area
Authors Research/results
Environmental science
Ding et al. 2015 The paper outlines an inclusive, causal framework for the assessment of the Sustainable Development,
entitled the Trinity of Cities’ Sustainability from Spatial, Logical and Time Dimensions (TCS–SLTD).
The TCS–SLTD model is a useful tool for guiding the process of the selection of Sustainable Development
Indicators, and provides a conceptual framework for the holistic assessment of the sustainability of a city
growth and expansion in developing countries.
Perales- The article presents an innovative regenerative urban stormwater methodology for transition management
Momparler at a city level, containing two main enablers to overcome the barriers that drag out progress.
et al. 2015
Bahadure, The authors assess the sustainability of the neighbourhoods with mixed land-use in the context of the
Kotharkar 2015 Nagpur city, India. The study revealed that neighbourhoods with high and moderate land-use mix are
sustainable with travel behaviour.
Alyami et al. The authors developed a weighting system that prioritizes the categories of the Saudi environmental
2015 assessment method (SEAM). The research methodology involves the use of the analytic hierarchy process
(AHP).
Rogers et al. The paper presents the case study approach to examine the third pillar more comprehensively, and offers the
2013 social capital as one measure of the social sustainability. Specifically, the social capital was used to measure
the social-environmental interface of communities. The positive correlation between aspects of the built
environment, specifically the walkability, and the social capital suggests that measuring the social aspect of
sustainability may be feasible, especially in the context of community development.
Ioan, Ursu 2012 The article provides an analysis of strategies for maintaining the sustainable quality of life in environments
with air conditioning.
Klein-Banai, The authors present an analysis of the ecological footprint of an urban university. A sensitivity analysis
Theis 2011 to examine the effect of climate change events on the footprint indicated that if all other factors are held
constant, climate change increases the ecological footprint of the University of Illinois in Chicago.
Reiter, Marique The authors proposed the methodology for assessing residential energy uses for buildings and transport
2012 at the scale of a city. This method is based on the use of the geographic information system (GIS) tools,
combined with a statistical treatment of urban and transport criteria.
Monahan, The paper evaluates the energy use, consequential emissions of CO2, and the annual running costs for a
Powell 2011 case study comprising 14 newly constructed low energy affordable homes. Four different energy typologies
are compared: ground sourced heat pumps; active solar (thermal and photovoltaic); passive solar and
mechanical ventilation with heat recovery; conventional high-efficiency gas boiler.
 Continue of Table 2

Authors Research/results
Björnberg 2009 The author presents an analysis of “a good built environment”. The objective of “a good built environment”
is evaluated by means of approximately 25 indicators focusing on different aspects of the urban
environment, such as the level of benzene in the air, the number of homes with damp and mould, and the
level of radon in apartment buildings.
Environmental studies
Dizdaroglu 2015 The paper proposes a set of key micro-level urban ecosystem indicators for monitoring the sustainability
of residential developments. The proposed indicator framework measures the sustainability performance
of urban ecosystem in 3 main categories including natural environment, built environment, and socio-
economic environment which are made up of 9 sub-categories, consisting of 23 indicators.
Lowe et al. 2015 The article gives an overview of liveability indicators used to date in Australia and internationally. Indicators
were measured at three scales: individual-level measures (e.g. perceptions of safety collected through
surveys); social or built environment-level measures (e.g. recorded crime rates or land use mix in a
particular area); or policy-level measures, which are used to collect information on urban policies or plans.
Dur et al. 2014 The authors developed a spatial index by a number of indicators compiled from international studies and
trialled in Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia. The model has proved useful in demarcating areas where
a planning intervention is applicable, and in identifying the most suitable locations for future urban
development and plan amendments.
Researchers integrated variance-based sensitivity analysis with the spatial indexing method and discussed
the applicability of the model in other urban contexts.
Conte, Monno The authors developed a cross-scale evaluation approach focusing on the reliability of sustainable building
2012 design solutions for the context, in which the building is situated. An integrated building–urban evaluation
model is proposed based on the urban matrix, which is a conceptualisation of the built environment as a
social–ecological system. The model aims at evaluating the sustainability of a building considering it as an
active entity contributing to the resilience of the urban matrix. Some holistic performance indicators are
used for evaluating such contribution, thus expressing the building reliability.
Morrissey et al. The article presents the developed framework for the Strategic Project Appraisal (SPA), grounded in
2012 the theory of the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA). It can be used as a means for practically
appraising project impacts and alternatives in terms of quantified ecological limits. It addresses the
neglected topic of the metropolitan infrastructure as a means of delivering sustainability outcomes in the
urban context and, more broadly, seeks to open a debate on the potential for the SEA methodology to be
more extensively applied to address sustainability challenges in the built environment. Practically applied
and timed appropriately, the SPA framework can enable better decision-making and more efficient resource
allocation ensuring the development of a low-impact infrastructure.
Borzacchiello The authors aimed at identifying the impact of differences in spatial accessibility on the development of
et al. 2010 the built environment in cities. Using some simple accessibility indicators, the authors attempted to map
out quantitatively the detailed implications of accessibility conditions for built-up areas, on the basis of a
25 x 25 m grid cell approach. The statistical tools used are the discriminant analysis and logistic regression,
followed by a GIS representation of the empirical results for four Dutch cities: Amsterdam, The Hague,
Rotterdam, and Utrecht.
Lau, Ho 2011 Open Building as a sustainable approach to deal with the problems associated with the aging housing stock.
It is seldom applied in high-rise, densely populated built environment. Implementing Open Building using
flexible and green fittings remains a viable option that enables transformation in existing housing stock.
Construction building technology
Siew 2015 The author proposed an alternative framework named the Green Building Fund that can be used for
the assessment of sustainable building funds. The framework will not only be useful for
AusIndustry (the funding body of the GBF) and other worldwide government departments
responsible for awarding green building funds but also for owners who are keen to strengthen their
application by improving the demonstration of project feasibility.
Rakhshan et al. Evaluating the sustainability impact of the improved building insulation. The study shows that in the
2013 particular case of the residential built environment of Dubai and the prevailing local electric power source
generation mechanisms, the environmental sustainability cost of adding the insulation levels required to
significantly mitigate transmission losses is small in comparison to the operational GHG emissions saved by
their application.
Pawar et al. 2015 The authors describe a procedure devised using the Geographic Information System (GIS) to delineate
boundaries of zones, where any change in thermal comfort requirement indicates a corresponding change
in responsive building design strategies.
 End of Table 2

Authors Research/results
Gibberd 2015 The Built Environment Sustainability Tool (BEST) was developed as a way of assessing the sustainability
performance of built environments and identifying ways for improving them.
Adrian et al. The authors present a methodology for evaluating the building performance of offices in Singapore whilst
2013 taking into account its surrounding morphology, using GIS as a platform for integration with an urban
climatic assessment tool.
Kim, Todorovic The article present the complex system of sustainability’s hierarchic character, criteria and indicators. A
2013 scheme of the structure and spatial-temporal vision of the Global sustainable development is presented,
showing that the approach to the global sustainable development can be reliable only if it is based on a
system of real human and ethical values applicable to every social, cultural and economic situation.
Bourdic et al. An innovative system of indicators is presented that meets the need for multi-scale and cross-scale
2012 indicators and encompasses the intrinsic complexity of the city. Based on a morphologic approach, new
mathematical formulas are used to generate urban sustainability indicators.
ALwaer, The authors developed the Consensus-based model (Sustainable Built Environment Tool – SuBETool).
Clements- The benefit of the new proposed model (SuBETool) is a ‘tool’ for a ‘comparative’ rather than an absolute
Croome 2010 measurement.
Ortiz et al. 2009 The review details LCA concepts and focuses on the LCA methodology and tools employed in the built
environment. The authors outline and discuss the differences between the LCA of building materials
and components combinations versus the LCA of the full building life cycle. The review can be used
by stakeholders as an important reference on LCA including up-to-date literature on approaches and
methodologies to preserve the environment and, therefore, achieve the sustainable development in both
developed and developing countries.
Ho et al. 2008 The authors conducted a survey of the health and safety performance of apartment buildings in a densely
populated city of Hong Kong, using a simplified assessment scheme.
Bentivegna et al. The BEQUEST framework for structuring information on sustainable urban development was developed
2002 and provides a unique, integrated representation of the scope and extent of the subject that links together
socio-economic and technical dimensions as well as planning, property, design and construction interests,
in time and space.
Yu, Kim 2011 The review presents the Building Environmental Assessment Schemes for Rating of IAQ in Sustainable
Buildings. The paper illustrates the criteria included in BREEAM, LEED and HK BEAM rating systems for
assessment of indoor air quality (IAQ).
Chen et al. 2010 The authors present the construction method selection for concrete buildings. This paper lays the
groundwork for automated tools to help make project-level decisions regarding prefabrication strategies
and facilitates the achievement of a healthy built environment, and thus the likelihood of sustainable
construction.
Buegl et al. 2009 An investigation was conducted into which sustainability criteria institutional real estate investors and real
estate fund (REF) suppliers consider important for the market success of sustainable property (real estate)
funds (S-REFs) and what is their market acceptance.

Those approaches have a strong focus on the perfor-

Conclusions
mance of the building itself and a reduction in
negative environmental impacts (doing less harm) 1. In achieving the sustainable development, the buil-
(Gibberd 2015). ding industry is a key player, because the built en-
A broader review of sustainable built vironment is responsible for significant use of the
environment applications in the areas of the final energy (62%) and is a major source of green-
environmental science, environmental studies, and house gas emissions (55%).
construction and building technology is presented in 2. While aiming to develop a healthy and safe
Table 2. environ- ment, based on the holistic approach in the
The review of foreign literature has revealed that face of the urbanisation issues, it is especially
the sustainable development is not only perceived as important to focus on the sustainable development
an integration of economic, social and environmen- with the help of the most up-to-date
tal criteria but also as the creation of healthy and safe methodologies, systems and solutions offered by
environment for the community. The integrated multi- foreign researchers.
criteria methods (such as AHP, Fuzzy) can be used for 3. The analysis of articles according to years of pu-
holistic assessment of multi-criteria decision-making blication (1998–2015) revealed that, compared to
related to the sustainable built environment. 2014, 2015 saw 57.13% more articles on criteria of
 the sustainable built environment and 66.67% more Bahadure, S.; Kotharkar, R. 2015. Assessing sustainability of
articles on indicators of the sustainable built envi- mixed use neighbourhoods through residents’ travel behav-
ronment. Most articles were published in England iour and perception: the case of Nagpur, India,
Sustainabili- ty 7(9): 12164–12189.
(containing the keyword “criterion”) and the USA http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su70912164
(containing the keyword “indicator”). According to Bentivegna, V.; Curwell, S.; Deakin, M.; Lombardi, P.; Mitch-
research areas, the majority of research efforts take ell, G.; Nijkamp, P. 2002. A vision and methodology for inte-
place in areas of construction and building techno- grated sustainable urban development: BEQUEST, Building
Research & Information 30(2): 83–94.
logies, engineering and environmental science eco- http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/096132102753436468
logy. The key categories of Web of Science, which Björnberg, K. E. 2009. Rational goals for the urban environ-
encompass the research on the sustainable built en- ment: A Swedish example, European Planning Studies
vironment, cover construction and building techno- 17(7): 1007–1027.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09654310902949570
logies, environmental science and studies, and civil
Borzacchiello, M. T.; Nijkamp, P.; Koomen, E. 2010.
engineering. Accessibil- ity and urban development: a grid-based
4. The review of foreign literature has revealed that comparative sta- tistical analysis of Dutch cities,
Environment and Planning B-Planning & Design 37(1):
the sustainable development is not only perceived
148–169. http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/b34126
as an integration of economic, social and environ- Bourdic, L.; Salat, S.; Nowacki, C. 2012. Assessing cities: a
mental criteria but also as the creation of healthy new system of cross-scale spatial indicators, Building
and safe environment for the community. The inte- Research & Information 40(5): 592–605.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2012.703488
grated multi-criteria methods (such as AHP, Fuzzy)
Buegl, R.; Leimgruber, C.; Hueni, G. R.; Scholz, R. W. 2009.
can be used for holistic assessment of multi-criteria Sustainable property funds: financial stakeholders’ views on
decision-making related to the sustainable built en- sustainability criteria and market acceptance, Building Re-
vironment. search & Information 37(3): 246–263.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09613210902843494
5. Sustainable built environment research is the subject
Chen, Y.; Okudan, G. E.; Riley, D. R. 2010. Sustainable perfor-
of this article, while various methods of MCDA are mance criteria for construction method selection in con-
treated as a tool. The benefits of resorting to the- crete buildings, Automation in Construction 19(2): 235–
se methods are evident. The reader must ascertain 244. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2009.10.004
that sustainable development belongs to the area of Conte, E.; Monno, V. 2012. Beyond the buildingcentric ap-
proach: A vision for an integrated evaluation of sustainable
multi-criteria problems, and today it has become an buildings, Environmental Impact Assessment Review 34:
imperative in designing issues at the interface of 31– 40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2011.12.003
the human being - ecology - economy. De Meester, B.; Dewull, J.; Verbeke, S.; Janssens, A.; Van Lan-
genhove, H. 2009. Energetic life-cycle assessment (ELCA),
Building and Environment 44 (1): 11–17.
References http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2008.01.004
Adrian, C. Z. M.; Hien, W. N.; Marcel, I.; Kardinal, J. S. 2013. Ding, X.; Zhong, W.; Shearmur, R. S.; Zhang, X.; Huisingh, D.
Predicting the envelope performance of commercial office 2015. An inclusive model for assessing the sustainability of
buildings in Singapore, Energy and Buildings 66: 66–76. cities in developing countries – Trinity of Cities’
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2013.07.008 Sustainabil- ity from Spatial, Logical and Time Dimensions
(TCS-SLTD), Journal of Cleaner Production 109: 62–75.
ALwaer, H.; Clements-Croome, D. J. 2010. Key performance
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.06.140
in- dicators (KPIs) and priority setting in using the multi-
attri- bute approach for assessing sustainable intelligent Dizdaroglu, D. 2015. Developing micro-level urban ecosystem
buildings, Building and Environment 45(5): 799–807. indicators for sustainability assessment, Environmental Im-
pact Assessment Review 54: 119–124.
Alyami, S. H.; Rezgui, Y.; Kwan, A. 2015. The development of http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2015.06.004
sustainable assessment method for Saudi Arabia built en-
Dur, F.; Yigitcanlar, T.; Bunker, J. 2014. A spatial-indexing
vironment: weighting system, Sustainability Science 10(1):
model for measuring neighbourhood-level land-use and
167–178. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11625-014-0252-x
transport integration, Environment and Planning B-
Anderson, J. E.; Wulfhorst, G.; Lang, W. 2015. Energy analysis Planning & Design 41(5): 792–812.
of the built environment – A review and outlook, http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/b39028
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 44: 149–158. Dziadosz, A.; Kapliński, O.; Rejment M. (2015) Łączne koszty
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.12.027 budynku w cyklu życia inwestycji budowlanej [Total costs
Antucheviciene, J.; Kala, Z.; Marzouk, M.; Vaidogas, E. R. of a building in the life cycle of a construction project], in:
(Eds.) 2015. Decision making methods and applications in A. Podchorecki (Ed.) Wybrane problemy budownictwa,
civil engineering. Mathematical Problems in Engineering. Uniwer- sytet Technologiczno-Przyrodniczy in Bydgoszcz,
Cairo: Hindawi Publishing Corporation. 127-134.
Gibberd, J. 2015. Measuring capability for sustainability: the
built environment sustainability tool (BEST), Building Re-
search & Information 43(1): 49–61.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2014.930257
Ho, D. C-W.; Chau, K-W.; Cheung, A. K-C.; Yau, Y.; Wong, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2011.10.005
S-K.; Leung, H-F.; Lau, S. S-Y.; Wong, Q-S. 2008. A
survey of the health and safety conditions of apartment
buildings in Hong Kong, Building and Environment 43(5):
764–775. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2007.01.035
Ioan, C. C.; Ursu, C. 2012. Real needs and preventive
strategies for maintaining sustainable quality of life in
environments with air conditioning, Environmental
Engineering and Man- agement Journal 1(4):879–884
Kaklauskas, A.; Zavadskas, E. K. (Eds.) 2015. Multiple
criteria analysis of the life cycle of the built environment.
Vilnius: Technika. 448 p.
Kaklauskas, A.; Zavadskas, E. K.; Dargis, R.; Bardauskienė,
D. (Eds.) 2015. Sustainable development of real estate.
Vilnius: Technika. 512 p. http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/2336-M
Kaklauskas, A.; Zavadskas, E.; Bardauskiene, D.; Dargis, P.
(Eds). 2014. Garmonichnoje razvitije nedvizhimogo
imushchestva. Vilnius: Technika. 424 p.
Kaklauskas, A.; Zavadskas, E. K. 2012. Biometricheskaja i
intellektual’naja podderzhka reshenij. Vilnius: Technika. 344
p.
Kaplinski O.; Peldschus F.; Tupenaite L. 2014. Development of
MCDM Methods – in honour of Professor Edmundas Ka-
zimieras Zavadskas on the occasion of his 70th birthday,
In- ternational Journal of Computers Communications &
Control 9(3): 305–312.
http://dx.doi.org/10.15837/ijccc.2014.3.1084
Kapliński, O.; Tupenaite, L. 2011. Review of the multiple
criteria decision making methods, intelligent and biometric
systems applied in modern construction economics,
Transformations in Business & Economics 10(1): 166–181.
Kim, J. T.; Todorovic, M. S. 2013. Towards sustainability index
for healthy buildings – Via intrinsic thermodynamics, green
accounting and harmony, Energy and Buildings 62: 627–
637. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2013.03.009
Klein-Banai, C.; Theis, T. L. 2011. An urban university’s eco-
logical footprint and the effect of climate change,
Ecological Indicators 11(3): 857–860.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2010.11.002
Lau, W. K. L.; Ho, D. C. W. 2011. Open building implementa-
tion in high-rise residential buildings in Hong Kong, Open
House International 36(1): 25–34.
Lowe, M.; Whitzman, C.; Badland, H.; Davern, M.; Aye, L.;
Hes, D.; Butterworth, I.; Giles-Corti, G. 2015. Planning
healthy, liveable and sustainable cities: how can indicators
inform policy?, Urban Policy and Research 33(2): 131–
144. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08111146.2014.1002606
Mardani, A.; Jusoh, A.; Zavadskas, E. K.; Cavallaro, F.;
Khalifah,
Z. 2015. Sustainable and renewable energy: an overview of
the application of multiple criteria decision making tech-
niques and approaches, Sustainability 7(10): 13947–13984.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su71013947
Monahan, J.; Powell, J. C. 2011. A comparison of the energy
and carbon implications of new systems of energy
provision in new build housing in the UK, Energy Policy
39(1): 290–298.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2010.09.041
Morrissey, J.; Iyer-Raniga, U.; McLaughlin, P.; Mills, A. 2012.
A strategic project appraisal framework for ecologically
sus- tainable urban infrastructure, Environmental Impact
Assess- ment Review 33(1): 55–65.
Ortiz, O.; Castells, F.; Sonnemann, G. 2009. Zavadskas, E. K.; Antuchevičienė, J.: Kaplinski, O. 2015b.
Sustainability in the construction industry: A Multi- criteria decision making in civil engineering, Part 2
review of recent developments based on LCA, – Ap- plications, Engineering Structures and Technologies
Construction and Building Materials 23(1): 28–39. 7(4): 151–167.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2007.11.012 http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/2029882X.2016.1139664
Pawar, A. S.; Mukherjee, M.; Shankar, R. 2015. Zavadskas, E. K.; Antucheviciente, J.; Turskis, Z.; Adeli, H.
Thermal comfort design zone delineation for India 2016. Hybrid multiple-criteria decision-making methods:
using GIS, Building and Environment 87: 193–206.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2015.01.009
Perales-Momparler, S.; Andrés-Doménech, I.; Andreu,
J.; Escu- der-Bueno, I. 2015. A regenerative urban
stormwater man- agement methodology: the
journey of a Mediterranean city, Journal of
Cleaner Production 109: 174–189.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.02.039
Rakhshan, K.; Friess, W. A.; Tajerzadeh, A. 2013.
Evaluating the sustainability impact of improved
building insulation: A case study in the Dubai
residential built environment, Building and
Environment 67: 105–110.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2013.05.010
Reiter, S.; Marique, A-F. 2012. Toward low energy
cities, Journal of Industrial Ecology 16(6): 829–
838. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1530-
9290.2012.00533.x
Rogers, A. H.; Gardner, K. H.; Carlson, C. H. 2013.
Social capi- tal and walkability as social aspects of
sustainability, Sustain- ability 5(8): 3473–3483.
Siew, R. Y. J. 2015. Alternative framework for
assessing sustain- able building funds: green
building fund, Building Research & Information
43(2): 160–169.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2014.936170
Srinivasan, S.; O‘Fallon, L. R.; Dearry, A. 2003.
Creating healthy communities, healthy homes,
healthy people: initiating a re- search agenda on
the built environment and public health, American
Journal of Public Health 93(9): 1446–1450.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.93.9.1446
Stanhope, M. 2012. Public health nursing: population-
centered health care in the community. Mosby. 8
ed. 1128 p.
Štreimikienė, D.; Čiegis, R.; Bankauskaitė-
Sereikienė, G.; Slavickienė, A.; Šarkiūnaitė, I.;
Mikalauskienė, A.; Lapėnienė, D.; Kiaušienė, I.
2014. Darnus vystymasis: teorija ir praktika
[Sustainable development: theory and practice],
[online], [cited 14 March 2016]. Available from
Internet:
http://www.khf.vu.lt/dokumentai/failai/soctyri/
Darnus_ Lietuvos_vystymasis_2014.pdf
Viteikiene, M.; Zavadskas, E. K. 2007. Evaluating the
sustain- ability of Vilnius city residential areas,
Journal of Civil Engi- neering and Management
8(2): 149–155.
Yu, C. W. F.; Kim, J. T. 2011. Building environmental
assessment schemes for rating of IAQ in
sustainable buildings, Indoor and Built
Environment 20(1): 5–15.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1420326X10397780
Zavadskas, E. K.; Antuchevičienė, J.: Kaplinski, O.
2015a. Multi- criteria decision making in civil
engineering, Part 1 – A state-of-the-art survey,
Engineering Structures and Technolo- gies 7(3):
103–113.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/2029882X.2015.1143204
 A review of applications in engineering, Scientia Iranica.
Zavadskas, E.; Antucheviciene, J. 2006. Development of an
Transactions A: Civil Engineering 23(1): 1–20.
indicator model and ranking of sustainable revitalization
Amsterdam: Elsevier Science BV. ISSN 1026-3098.
alternatives of derelict property: a Lithuanian case study,
Zavadskas, E. K.; Turskis, Z.; Kildienė, S. 2014. State of art Sustainable Development 14(5): 287–299.
sur- veys of overviews on MCDM/MADM methods, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sd.285
Technologi- cal and Economic Development of Economy
20(1): 165–179.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/20294913.2014.892037
Zavadskas, E. K.; Viteikienė, M.; Šaparauskas, J. 2007.
Sustain- able development assessment of cities and their
residential districts, Ekologija 53: 49–54.

Ieva UBARTE is a PhD student of Civil Engineering at Vilnius Gediminas Technical University. She is a Junior Researcher at the
Research Institute of Smart Building Technologies. Research interests: sustainable built environment, life cycle, safe and healthy
house, intelligent decision support systems.

Oleg KAPLIŃSKI is Professor of CE at Faculty of Architecture (IAP), Poznan University of Technology, Poznan, Poland. He
lec- tures in economics and organization of the investment process, as well as theory and principles of work places design. The
author of 240 publications. Doctor Honoris Causa of VGTU (1996). Member of the CE Committee of the Polish Academy of
Sciences. His current research focuses on: integral management, integral design, risk management, theory of decision making and
research methods in CE and architecture.
View publication stats
TINJAUAN LINGKUNGAN BUILT BERKELANJUTAN DI 1998-2015
Ieva UBARTE, Oleg KAPLINSKI
Lembaga Penelitian Teknologi Bangunan Pintar, Fakultas Teknik Sipil, Universitas Teknik Vilnius
Gediminas, Saulėtekio al. 11, LT-10223, Vilnius, Lithuania

Fakultas Arsitektur, Universitas Teknologi Poznan, Nieszawska 13C, 60-965 Poznan, Polandia
Diterima 22 April 2016; diterima 10 Mei 2016
Abstrak. Kota adalah fenomena fisik dan sosial yang kompleks yang terus berkembang dan
mengalami perubahan kuantitatif dan kualitatif. Kesejahteraan seluruh masyarakat tergantung
pada keberlanjutan lingkungan binaan. Artikel ini menyajikan tinjauan literatur tentang lingkungan
binaan berkelanjutan, yang dibuat berdasarkan database Thomson Reuters Web of Science Core
Collection.
Kata kunci: lingkungan binaan berkelanjutan, ilmu lingkungan, studi lingkungan, teknologi
konstruksi dan bangunan, tinjauan literatur
Pengantar
Lingkungan buatan - tempat yang dimodifikasi manusia seperti rumah, sekolah, tempat
kerja, taman, area industri, pertanian, dan jalan raya adalah habitat kita yang paling penting. Ini
mencakup semua bagian fisik tempat kita tinggal dan bekerja misal rumah, bangunan, jalan, ruang
terbuka, dan infrastruktur. Dalam mencapai pembangunan berkelanjutan, industri yang terbangun
merupakan kunci karena lingkungan terbangun bertanggung jawab atas penggunaan energi final
secara signifikan (62%) dan merupakan sumber utama emisi gas rumah kaca (55%).
Interaksi yang konstruktif antara tiga komponen utama lingkungan, ekonomi dan
masyarakat adalah tulang punggung konsep pembangunan berkelanjutan. Kota adalah fenomena
fisik dan sosial yang kompleks yang terus berkembang sehingga mengalami perubahan kuantitatif
dan kualitatif. Kesejahteraan seluruh masyarakat tergantung pada keberlanjutan pembangunan
perkotaan. Pembangunan berkelanjutan menjadi prinsip utama dalam perencanaan format baru
dari area perumahan kota. Dimensi masalah yang dipertimbangkan tumbuh ketika kebutuhan
analisis siklus hidup dipertimbangkan.
Para peneliti menggunakan berbagai metode MCDM untuk menganalisis lingkungan binaan
berkelanjutan. MCDM telah digunakan dalam ilmu lingkungan, di bidang ekologi (kaitannya dengan
bahan bakar energi. Berdasarkan ulasan oleh Zavadskas et al. (2016), mengenai penerapan metode
pengambilan keputusan multi-kriteria hibrida dalam rekayasa, pendekatan metodologis yang
paling populer adalah kombinasi AHP renyah dengan TOPSIS atau ANP dengan TOPSIS, serta
kombinasi mereka dalam lingkungan fuzzy. Dalam analisis masalah yang berkaitan dengan energi
berkelanjutan dan energi terbarukan, metode yang paling populer adalah AHP, VIKOR dan ANP,
TOPSIS dan PROMETHEE, dll.
Artikel ini menyajikan tinjauan lingkungan binaan berkelanjutan pada tahun 1998-2015,
yang dibuat berdasarkan basis data Kumpulan Inti Web of Science. Bertujuan untuk
mengembangkan lingkungan yang sehat dan aman, berdasarkan pendekatan holistik dalam
menghadapi masalah urbanisasi, sangat penting untuk fokus pada pembangunan berkelanjutan
dengan bantuan metodologi, sistem, dan solusi terbaru yang ditawarkan oleh para peneliti.
1. . Metodologi penelitian

- kriteria lingkungan + dibangun berkelanjutan;

- Indikator + lingkungan binaan berkelanjutan.

2. Analisis publikasi
2.1. Jumlah publikasi: menurut tahun dan negara
Analisis artikel berdasarkan tahun (1998-2015) mengungkapkan bahwa, dibandingkan
dengan 2014, 2015 melihat 57,13% lebih banyak artikel tentang kriteria lingkungan binaan
berkelanjutan dan 66,67% lebih banyak artikel tentang indikator lingkungan binaan berkelanjutan.
Selain itu, 2016 sudah memiliki satu artikel tentang kriteria lingkungan binaan berkelanjutan.
Perbandingan hasil pencarian menunjukkan bahwa 14,03% lebih banyak artikel dipublikasikan
tentang indikator lingkungan binaan berkelanjutan daripada kriteria lingkungan binaan
berkelanjutan.

2.2 Jumlah publikasi menurut area penelitian dan kategori Web of Science
Kategori-kategori utama Web of Science, yang juga mencakup penelitian tentang lingkungan
terbangun yang berkelanjutan, adalah: teknologi bangunan konstruksi, ilmu dan studi lingkungan,
dan teknik sipil (Gambar 5). Berdasarkan analisis artikel oleh kategori Web of Science, ada 11,37%
dari artikel menggunakan kata kunci "indikator" dibandingkan dengan yang mengandung kata
kunci "kriteria", atau 123 dan 103 artikel, masing-masing. Karena hal ini, tiga bidang berikut dari
aplikasi dipilih untuk analisis lebih lanjut: ilmu lingkungan, studi lingkungan, konstruksi dan
teknologi bangunan
3. Analisis lingkungan binaan berkelanjutan dalam tiga kategori utama Web of Science: ilmu
lingkungan, studi lingkungan, dan teknologi konstruksi dan bangunan
Istilah pembangunan berkelanjutan dapat digambarkan sebagai peningkatan kualitas hidup
yang memungkinkan orang untuk hidup dalam lingkungan yang sehat dan meningkatkan kondisi
sosial, ekonomi dan lingkungan untuk generasi sekarang dan mendatang. Dalam sebuah penelitian
membuktikan pentingnya lingkungan yang sehat dan aman. Dilihat dari hubungan antara
pengembangan lingkungan yang sehat, aman dan kepadatan bangunan tempat tinggal. Sebagian
besar variasi dalam kondisi kesehatan dan keselamatan bangunan dikaitkan dengan perbedaan
dalam sistem manajemen bangunan daripada desain bangunan.
Tinjauan literatur asing telah mengungkapkan bahwa pembangunan berkelanjutan tidak
hanya dianggap sebagai integrasi kriteria ekonomi, sosial dan lingkungan tetapi juga sebagai
penciptaan lingkungan yang sehat dan aman bagi masyarakat. Metode multikriteria terintegrasi
dapat digunakan untuk penilaian holistik pengambilan keputusan multi-kriteria terkait dengan
lingkungan binaan berkelanjutan.
Kesimpulan
1. Dalam mencapai pembangunan berkelanjutan, industri bangunan adalah pemain kunci, karena
lingkungan binaan bertanggung jawab atas penggunaan energi final secara signifikan dan
merupakan sumber utama emisi gas rumah kaca.
2. Pendekatan holistik dalam menghadapi masalah urbanisasi sangat penting pada pembangunan
berkelanjutan dengan bantuan metodologi, sistem dan sistem yang paling mutakhir. solusi yang
ditawarkan oleh peneliti asing.
3. Sebagian besar upaya penelitian berlangsung di bidang konstruksi dan teknologi bangunan,
teknik dan ekologi ilmu lingkungan. Kategori utama dari Web of Science, yang mencakup penelitian
tentang lingkungan binaan berkelanjutan, mencakup teknologi konstruksi dan bangunan, ilmu dan
studi lingkungan, dan teknik sipil.
4. Tinjauan literatur asing telah mengungkapkan bahwa pembangunan berkelanjutan tidak hanya
dianggap sebagai integrasi kriteria ekonomi, sosial dan lingkungan tetapi juga sebagai penciptaan
lingkungan yang sehat dan aman bagi masyarakat.
5. Penelitian lingkungan terbangun yang berkelanjutan adalah subjek dari artikel ini, sementara
berbagai metode MCDA diperlakukan sebagai alat.