buildings

Article
Architectural Design: Sustainability in the
Decision-Making Process
Margarida Feria 1 and Miguel Amado 2, *
1 GEOTPU.LAB—Laboratory of Architecture, Territory and Urban Planning Studies of IST, 1049-001 Lisboa,
Portugal; [email protected]
2 CERIS, Civil Engineering Research and Innovation for Sustainability of Universidade de Lisboa,
Av Rovisco Pais 1, 1049-001 Lisboa, Portugal
* Correspondence: [email protected]




Received: 8 April 2019; Accepted: 22 May 2019; Published: 27 May 2019


Abstract: This article discusses the potential of introducing sustainability in the architectural design
method so that building solutions can contribute to sustainable development. Sustainability has
introduced a new pattern to the architecture practice, which involves important modifications in the
teaching of architecture in what regards to the design methods to students but also practitioners,
in order to provide more comfort for present and future generations. In the design phases of
the architectural design, the subject of the three pillars of sustainability—economic, social and
environmental factors—are not always considered by the architect in the decision-making process.
The topic involves actions that will influence the overall performance of the building throughout
its lifecycle. Sustainability has not been a priority in the training of the architect. The existing tools,
Sustainability Assessment and Certification Systems, although adequate to evaluate the sustainability
component of a building, do not prove to be the most appropriate tool to support architects during
the design process. Therefore, the implementation and evaluation of strategies that integrate the
sustainability principles need to be included in the early stages of the architectural design method.
In addition to collecting data through literature review, a survey was conducted among 217 architects
and architecture students in order to access the need for a tool that supports architects in the issue of
sustainability. The results concluded that, although all the respondents agree about what concerns the
implementation of sustainability principles in the architectural design method, only few respondents
guarantee that these principles are implemented by means of a rigorous evaluation. Thus, the purpose
of this paper is to identify a set of guidelines that can help architects to change the current approach
of architectural practice towards more sustainable strategies in building design. This means the
introduction, implementation and evaluation of sustainability principles in different phases of the
architectural design method. The proposal stresses the main strategies that need to be considered in
each phase of the architectural project and defines a level of recommendation in each guideline that
allows the architect to evaluate the implementation of sustainability.

Keywords: sustainability; guidelines; architectural design method; Assessment and Certification

Systems; survey

1. Introduction
The current state of global development poses new challenges to the architectural profession:
it must transform and adapt itself in order to ensure a role with greater relevance in the search for
effective sustainable solutions.
In this sense, it is important to understand the connection of the architect with the sustainable
development, because his relationship with the design practice of the architect sustainability is

Buildings 2019, 9, 135; doi:10.3390/buildings9050135 www.mdpi.com/journal/buildings

Buildings 2019, 9, 135 2 of 13

introduced in the paradigm of architecture as a necessity that entails important modifications in the
teaching of architecture as well as the design methods of students and practitioners in order to provide
prosperity for present and future generations.
Over the last decades, it has been substantiated that the excessive consumption of natural resources
surpasses their replacement time. This scenario is not viable to maintain a balance between the needs of
human activities and their adaptation to the environment to guarantee future conditions of enjoyment
for the upcoming generations. Since the construction industry is responsible for the exploitation of
50% of the world’s natural resources [1,2] it is also one of the sectors that could most contribute to the
reduction of environmental impacts.
According to UNESCO and International Union of Architects (UIA), Charter for Architectural
Education, “ . . . architecture involves everything that influences the way in which the built environment
is planned, designed, made, used, furnished, landscaped and maintained” and so “ . . . architectural
education constitutes some of the most significant environmental and professional challenges of the
contemporary world” [3].
It is expected that the construction sector will continue to grow in the next years as housing
demand increases globally [4]. According to The Global Status Report 2017, over the next 40 years,
the sector floor area of buildings will double, adding more than 230 billion square meters in new
construction [5]. Therefore, it is important, as a global measure, to know how societies’ development
models can maximize sustainability in order to foster social, economic and technological progress with
the efficient use of natural resources and energy. To achieve this goal, it is necessary to change the
current approach of architectural practice towards more sustainable strategies in building design. This
means that the practice of architects should be re-designed to accommodate a better understanding of
the effects of climate change in a rapidly urbanization process and an economic crisis [6].

2. Literature Review
The principle of sustainable development emerged as a response to the general panorama at the
end of the 20th century, which was characterized by rapid industrial development and the considerable
increase of the world population [7] that led to an uncontrolled exploitation of natural resources.
Since the 1970s, a set of international political agendas have been proposed, calling for cooperation
between nations and the various sectors of human activities. The Brundtland Report has become one
of the most important reflections on sustainable development since it allied the need for economic
growth to environmental and social issues. Also called “Our Common Future”, the Brundtland Report
was released in 1987 by the World Commission on Environment and Development of United Nations
and defined for the first time the concept of sustainable development as “( . . . ) development that meets
the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own
needs” [8]. The interpretation of Brundtland’s definition suggests that to acknowledge the sustainable
component of a building, it is important to consider the environmental, social and economic dimensions
of sustainability.
In 1994, the concept of sustainable construction first appeared during the First International
Conference on Sustainable Construction in Tampa, Florida, where different approaches were
communicated towards a definition of sustainable construction. At the conference, Charles Kibert
presented the concept of greater consensus for the sustainable construction sector, defining it as “the
creation and operation of a healthy built environment based on ecological principles and resource
efficiency” [9], considering soil, materials, energy and water as the most important resources for
construction. It is from these resources that architects need to establish the use of the following
principles to a sustainable construction [10]:
• Minimization of resource consumption;
• Reduction of maintenance necessities;
• Recycling of materials at the end of the building life cycle;
• Protection of natural systems and their function in all activities;
Buildings 2019, 9, 135 3 of 13

• Promotion of the quality of the built environment.

Throughout the building life cycle, sustainable construction presents multiple advantages. It has
a positive impact on the environment through energy conservation, saving water and other resources,
use of reusable, natural and local materials, reducing pollutant emissions, recycling life cycle waste
of the constructions and increasing building durability [11,12]. It also has positive social effects:
guaranteeing users’ health and comfort through indoor air quality and acoustics comfort, as well as
accessibility, security and preservation of cultural heritage. Moreover, sustainable construction also
provides economic benefits in the long-term.
The role of sustainable construction is also reinforced by Sustainability Assessment and
Certification Systems that allow estimations of the level of efficiency and sustainability achieved by
improving the quality and performance of buildings. These systems evaluate environmental, economic
and social dimensions of sustainability and are greatly increasing the attention towards sustainable
assessment of buildings [13–15].
Even though sustainability assessment tools are valuable to verify if a building is sustainable,
they are mostly developed to evaluate the construction only after it is built and are not suitable
to assist architects in building design because they do not approach specific strategies to guide
practitioners [16–19]. Also, the possibility to reduce negative impacts of a building is greater in the
design phase, when approximately 80% of the building consumption is defined [10].
Since the decisions made during the design phase will influence the building’s performance
throughout the rest of its lifecycle, it is important that architects consider sustainability principles
during the design process. This is possible through the linked and weighted implementation of
preventive and passive strategies over active strategies [20]. Also, architectural professionals have an
important role to future low energy in sustainable buildings, since it is in the design phase were the
decisions take place [21].
The implementation of such strategies can be aided by a tool that can support architects in the
implementation of sustainability principles during the architectural design process [22].

2.1. Architectural Design Methods

The design studio is the most effective architectural education and methodological training tool.
The studio functions as a pedagogic constructor in which acquired knowledge and skills are applied in
the design process through problem solving.
It is predicted that in the design studio the application of previous theoretical knowledge and
the acculturation, which influences the definition of the concept, will allow the architect to find the
solution to the problem.
Rapid development in the knowledge generated and the empowerment promoted, skills, methods
and tools for the design domain have a direct impact on the way the activities are conducted in the
studio [23]. It is important to consider the learning process of design in the studio as one that in its
practice assumes a form of collaborative work and knowledge integration.
Architectural education must inspire creativity and innovation, but also dialogue, inclusivity
and critical thinking to reinforce determination towards operative communication and team
collaboration [24].
It is very important that the education in architecture is sufficiently strong, so that the students
acquire skills and competencies to deal with the sustainability issues in the future [18–25].
There are different perspectives on the architect’s role in the process of creating and transforming
spaces. On the other hand, the origin of ideas, decisions, values and selected references are attitudes
depending on a personal understanding of the reality of all the principles of sustainability [26].
In this paper we do not consider the activity of the architect who does not design but still has an
administrative role in public activities.
Sustainable principles need to be consciously integrated into the architectural design method to
establish a solid and coherent foundation for sustainability throughout the remaining life cycle of the
Buildings 2019, 9, 135 4 of 13

building [10]. Architectural design methods must be studied in order to understand how they can
adapt to the requirements of the present and the needs of the future.
In the field of architecture, there is a lack of a body of theory to support the study of architectural
design methods [27,28]. Thus, it is essential to review and reinterpret concepts from other fields
of study. [29–32] identify the following normative models, currently used in urban planning, as some
of the most important: Synoptic or Rational Comprehensive, Incremental, Transactive and Advocatory.
However, within the field of existing planning models, it is still fundamental to mention the Scientific
Method that is widely used by architects.
Table 1, adapted from the work of [30] to fit the scope of architecture, compares the theoretical
planning models regarding their relation to the promotion of sustainable development in architecture.
It can be concluded that, although the models may contribute to the implementation of some
strategies that promote sustainability, none of them reflect a direct tendency towards the aims of
sustainable development. This in turn suggests that there is the need to analyze a new planning model,
integrable in the architectural design method, which adheres to the framework of all the principles of
sustainable development.

Table 1. Schematic overview of various planning theories.

Global/National Local Fair Respect for Human, Potential for

Header Environmental and Environmental Distribution Political and Civil Change of Societal
Resource Concerns Concerns of Benefits Rights Frame Conditions
Synoptic (+) (−) (+) (−) X
Incremental - - - (+) (+)
Transactive (−) (+) (+) + +
Advocatory X + (−) + +
Scientific (+) (+) (−) X (+)
+ usually well suited, (+) may be suited under certain condition, X no evidence, (−) may cause negative effects;
- usually has negative effects. Source: [30] (adapted).

Architectural design methods require a simpler, flexible and inclusive planning model that
provides a connection with the objectives of sustainable development and therefore anticipates the
long-term effects of constructions in the environment.
Considering that the architectural design method complements at least four phases: program
definition, feasibility study, preliminary design and detail design, each of these phases is implemented
by a decision-making process which involves: analysis, synthesis, evaluation and decision [31,33–35]).
Ref. [36] consider the method as being a multidimensional construction of a more processual
nature and identify indicators of academic engagement from a multilateral perspective as three stand
points: behavioral, cognitive and affective.
Regarding architectural design methods, they contemplate sustainability issues, the phases of
analysis and whether synthesis should be responsible for the implementation of sustainable principles,
while the evaluation phase should validate the conformity of the hypotheses with the established
principles (Figure 1). As concluded by the developed survey, the evaluation phase is often empirical
or non-existent among architects, which exposes the lack of a systemic assessment method with a
theoretical basis that can guide architects during the assessment phase [37].
Buildings 2019,9,9,135
Buildings2019, x FOR PEER REVIEW 55 of
of 13
13

FigureFigure 1. Decision-making
1. Decision-making processprocess to implement
to implement sustainability.
sustainability. Source:Source: [34] (adapted).
[34] (adapted).

2.2. Key Indicators of Sustainability in Architectural Design

2.2. Key Indicators of Sustainability in Architectural Design
In order to measure the sustainability of the implemented solutions, key indicators must be
In order to measure the sustainability of the implemented solutions, key indicators must be
identified. These indicators ensure that all principles and components of sustainability are systematically
identified. These indicators ensure that all principles and components of sustainability are
considered in the architectural design method. Although Sustainability Assessment and Certification
systematically considered in the architectural design method. Although Sustainability Assessment
Systems “are not originally designed to serve as design guidelines” (Ding, 2008:456), it is possible to
and Certification Systems “are not originally designed to serve as design guidelines” (Ding,
rely on these tools to identify key indicators that can measure the sustainability of various solutions
2008:456), it is possible to rely on these tools to identify key indicators that can measure the
during the design process.
sustainability of various solutions during the design process.
Sustainability Assessment and Certification Systems are technical instruments that identify, predict
Sustainability Assessment and Certification Systems are technical instruments that identify,
and evaluate the environmental impact of buildings and then assign a level of certification related to
predict and evaluate the environmental impact of buildings and then assign a level of certification
the accomplishment of sustainability principles [14,38]. The evaluation of most of these systems is
related to the accomplishment of sustainability principles [14,38]. The evaluation of most of these
based on the attribution of credits or points when certain parameters are met. These parameters are
systems is based on the attribution of credits or points when certain parameters are met. These
organized by categories and vary according to the assessment system. Each category is given a specific
parameters are organized by categories and vary according to the assessment system. Each category
weight according to its importance in relation to the level of sustainability in construction. The sum
is given a specific weight according to its importance in relation to the level of sustainability in
of the various scores attributed to each category results in a graded classification for the sustainable
construction. The sum of the various scores attributed to each category results in a graded
performance of the building.
classification for the sustainable performance of the building.
According to different studies [38,39] that compare different assessment and certification systems,
According to different studies [38,39] that compare different assessment and certification
the categories that present the highest weights are the environmental loading, internal environment,
systems, the categories that present the highest weights are the environmental loading, internal
external environmental
environment, impact and resources.
external environmental impact and In general, the areas
resources. most linked
In general, the areasto the environmental
most linked to the
component are more relevant compared to socioeconomic and political
environmental component are more relevant compared to socioeconomic and political factors, planning and innovation.
factors,
The weightings
planning and innovation. of the systems are determined according to the degree of importance assigned to
each Theof the categoriesofofthe
weightings evaluation,
systems areanddetermined
these are directly related
according to theto degree
the situations of each assigned
of importance country.
Among the several systems, the energy efficiency requirement is consistently assigned
to each of the categories of evaluation, and these are directly related to the situations of each country. a higher value
as it is recognized
Among the severalassystems,
one of the themost urgent
energy needs.requirement
efficiency Great importance is also given
is consistently to theanature
assigned higherof the
value
materials, conservation of potable water and to parameters related to indoor environmental
as it is recognized as one of the most urgent needs. Great importance is also given to the nature of the comfort
such as visual,
materials, thermal and
conservation acousticwater
of potable comfort
andas towell as indoor
parameters air quality.
related to indoor environmental comfort
Based on these weightings and considering the architects’
such as visual, thermal and acoustic comfort as well as indoor air quality. thinking-process in architectural
design, Based on these weightings and considering the architects’ thinking-process inpotable
the following five key sustainability indicators were selected: energy efficiency, water
architectural
conservation, indoor air quality, acoustic comfort and project durability. These were
design, the following five key sustainability indicators were selected: energy efficiency, potable water considered the
most representative
conservation, indoorand air suitable to be integrated
quality, acoustic comfort inandtheproject
methodological
durability.framework
These wereofconsidered
architecturalthe
design methods [40].
most representative and suitable to be integrated in the methodological framework of architectural
designBy methods
implementing[40]. strategies that contemplated the selected five key indicators, in all the phases of
the architectural
By implementingdesignstrategies
method, that
othercontemplated
sustainabilitythe parameters
selected fivecouldkeybe determined,
indicators, in allbut
thealso the
phases
sustainability of the project could be guaranteed.
of the architectural design method, other sustainability parameters could be determined, but also the
sustainability of the project could be guaranteed.
3. Research Methodology
This research
3. Research combines theoretical and empirical evidence, that is, establishment of a theoretical
Methodology
framework in order to ensure the adequacy on an empirical and holistic approach. The methodology
This research combines theoretical and empirical evidence, that is, establishment of a theoretical
has been defined to allow the understanding of the relationship of the design practice of the architect
framework in order to ensure the adequacy on an empirical and holistic approach. The methodology
with the sustainability. In this way, the research adopts a sequence of four steps that enabled to quantify
has been defined to allow the understanding of the relationship of the design practice of the architect
with the sustainability. In this way, the research adopts a sequence of four steps that enabled to
Buildings 2019, 9, 135 6 of 13
Buildings 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 13

the principal
quantify the factors
principal considered by architects
factors considered byand architecture
architects and students
architecturein introducing
students insustainability
introducing
issue in the architectural design.
sustainability issue in the architectural design.
In its
In its first
first step,
step, the
the research
research was was done
done at at the
the level
level ofof the
the presuppositions
presuppositions for for the
the understanding
understanding
of the architect’s knowledge of Sustainable Development and its relationship with the
of the architect’s knowledge of Sustainable Development and its relationship with the architect’s
architect’s
design practice. The fact that architecture involves a huge number of relations between the
design practice. The fact that architecture involves a huge number of relations between the natural
natural
and built environment as well as the social requirements of human activities,
and built environment as well as the social requirements of human activities, through which the main through which the main
factors need to be identified for their efficient performance in design. To reach an understanding of
factors need to be identified for their efficient performance in design. To reach an understanding of
the current state of the real necessities of architects and the advantages of
the current state of the real necessities of architects and the advantages of existing system to help to existing system to help to
implement the
implement principles of
the principles sustainability in
of sustainability in design,
design, the
the research
research considered
considered the the definition
definition of
of aa list
list of
of
indicators that can be representative of sustainable development applied
indicators that can be representative of sustainable development applied to architecture design [10]. to architecture design [10].
The
The second
second stepstep ofof the
the research
research process
process has been aa development
has been development of of aa survey
survey toto professional
professional architects
architects
and architecture students from different countries and with different backgrounds,
and architecture students from different countries and with different backgrounds, with the objective with the objective
to create a framework of the skills they must have to deal with the subject of
to create a framework of the skills they must have to deal with the subject of sustainability applied to sustainability applied to
design [41].
design [41]. The
The third
third step
step was
was assessing
assessing thethe group
group ofof indicators
indicators related
related toto sustainable
sustainable principles
principles that
that
must be considered in all design processes conducted by the architects
must be considered in all design processes conducted by the architects who participate in the fourth who participate in the fourth
step of
step of the
the research
research process
process with
with thethe proposal
proposal of of guidelines
guidelines to to assist
assist their
their practice.
practice.
This research resulted in the identification and formulation of a structureofofdesign
This research resulted in the identification and formulation of a structure designphases
phasesand anda
list of guidelines supported in a strategic thinking of architect to implement
a list of guidelines supported in a strategic thinking of architect to implement sustainability in design sustainability in design
(Figure
(Figure 2).2).

STEP 1 Literature review

STEP 2 Survey
STEP 3 Selection of indicators
STEP 4 Proposal of guidelines

Figure 2.
Figure 2. Research
Research method.
method.

4. Survey
4. Survey
The actors
The actorsinvolved
involvedininthe thedesign
designof of
architectural projects
architectural andand
projects the trainers of future
the trainers architects
of future need
architects
to collaborate and develop new and different teaching approaches that promote
need to collaborate and develop new and different teaching approaches that promote skills and skills and competences
for future professional
competences for futurepractice. The requirement
professional practice. Thethat sustainability
requirement that introduces in the
sustainability design process
introduces in the
demands from the architect the ability to develop strategies and new guidelines
design process demands from the architect the ability to develop strategies and new guidelines for for the project.
The opportunity for the architect to work with a multidisciplinary team requires new ways and
the project.
means ofopportunity
The communication. Engineers
for the architectand architects
to work with apossess such skills,team
multidisciplinary however, mostnew
requires architects
ways and do
not know how to restore to empirical tools or bypass the deeper approach without
means of communication. Engineers and architects possess such skills, however, most architects do a visible result.
The opportunity
not know how to restore to to
extend the set
empirical of or
tools principles
bypass theintroduced in the design
deeper approach process
without reduces
a visible result.the
communication issues between architects and engineers, leading to new
The opportunity to extend the set of principles introduced in the design process reduces ways in which the more
the
humanistic, philosophical and cultural approach to architecture is able to proceed
communication issues between architects and engineers, leading to new ways in which the more towards the positivist
attitude of the
humanistic, engineer where
philosophical andsubjectivity is non-existent.
cultural approach to architecture is able to proceed towards the
An online survey was conducted to assess architectural
positivist attitude of the engineer where subjectivity is non-existent. professionals and architecture students
to analyze and understand their viewpoints and opinions about
An online survey was conducted to assess architectural professionals the necessities on the advantages
and architecture studentsof
creating
to analyzea system that can support
and understand architects and
their viewpoints in the implementation
opinions about theof sustainability
necessities on the principles
advantages in the
of
design process [41].
creating a system that can support architects in the implementation of sustainability principles in the
designThe developed
process [41]. survey yielded 217 responses and the statistical results are presented in Table A1.
The survey and
The developed the number of questions
survey yielded are sufficient
217 responses and and sensibly effective
the statistical to obtain
results are presented datainrelated
Table
A1. The survey and the number of questions are sufficient and sensibly effective to obtain dataas
to what issues are of importance and what architects do to deal with sustainability as well what
related
method
to what they apply.
issues are of importance and what architects do to deal with sustainability as well as what
All the respondents
method they apply. (100%) considered that sustainability should be implemented in the
architectural design process
All the respondents (100%) (Question 2), eventhat
considered though approximately
sustainability should46%beofimplemented
them said that inthey
the
evaluated the design
architectural implementation of sustainability
process (Question empirically
2), even and 30% of the 46%
though approximately respondents
of themdo notthat
said evaluate
they
evaluated the implementation of sustainability empirically and 30% of the respondents do not
evaluate the sustainability component of their projects at all (Question 3). This indicates that a
Buildings 2019, 9, 135 7 of 13

the sustainability component of their projects at all (Question 3). This indicates that a systematic
evaluation, with a theoretical foundation, is not part of most respondents’ architectural design methods.
When asked if Sustainability Assessment and Certification Systems were adequate to support
architects during the design phase (Question 4), only 26% of the respondents considered these factors
appropriate, whereas most of the respondents (72%) did not know. When questioned about which of
the methods was most effective to ensure the implementation of sustainability (Question 5), almost
half (49.3%) stated that the Systematic methods with theoretical foundations adapted to architectural
design process was the best one and approximately a third (31.8%) of them admitted not knowing.
It is crucial to notice that, although 46% of the inquired said that they used an Empirical Method to
evaluate the implementation of sustainability, only 3% considered it the most suitable method.
To provide respondents with the opportunity to express additional opinion, one optional
open-ended question enabled them to write any comments related to what they consider necessary for
developing guidelines for a sustainable project.
Overall, it can be understood that, although all the respondents agree that sustainability principles
should be implemented in the architectural design process, only few respondents guarantee that these
principles are implemented by means of a rigorous evaluation. This, in turn, highlights the need for
a system that supports architects in guaranteeing sustainability as an integral part of architectural
design method.

5. Guidelines to Sustainable Architecture Design

Implementing sustainability into architectural design methods requires sustainability principles to
be considered from the beginning of the design process [42]. In order to assist architects in selecting the
best strategies and verify their alignment with the aims of sustainability, guidelines for a sustainable
project have been developed. These guidelines were determined from the previously selected key
indicators of sustainability [43].
An integrated approach to sustainability leads to a design solution where the technical aspects
are inserted into the design process. In the sketching phase, the project becomes better defined and
the indoor environmental conditions and the energy frame of the building are starting to become
determined by the design [44]. This decision is also important for the level of comfort, and for a quality
working environment for future users. From an economic point of view, the operating costs can be
reduced to a minimum when the climate screen of the building considers passive strategies, thus,
saving energy for cooling and heating, and the passive ventilation principles employed also reduce
energy consumptions.
Therefore, it is important that the design process takes into account the passive strategies in
different phases of the operative process:
Analysis—site analysis (history, architecture, genius loci, green structures, infrastructure,
equipment and facilities in the area and the social structure of inhabitants). Comfort analysis
(based on CR 1752). Climate analysis (solar data and calculations of altitude and azimuth, temperature,
rainfall, humidity, prevalent wind). Regulation analysis of legislative demands (building codes and
municipality documents).
Sketching—Site plan. Solar simulations of site plan in order to identify shadows from buildings
and other volumes. Green roofs to save rain water and influence the level of humidity. Daylight levels
in the middle of the buildings and glare risk. Identify the U-values to the site and uses requirement
(insulation thickness). Simulation of heating and cooling load. Ventilation passive strategies (natural
ventilation, dimension and placement of windows). Atriums in relation to entrance area in the
dwellings. Open floor plans. Construction system (structure). Physical models or virtual models to
help to understand the scale and shape.
Synthesis—Ventilation passive strategies (natural ventilation, dimension and placement of
windows). Calculation of the heating and cooling load. Selection of interior materials based on space
acoustic performance. Criteria selection of materials based on Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) balance.
Buildings 2019, 9, 135 8 of 13

Calculation of a structural detail (timber, iron or concrete). Calculation of minimal ventilation rate and
the opening area of the windows to maximize the result. Physical models or virtual models.
All of these different parameters were integrated in the design process at various stages as tools
rather than obstacles. These principles need to be understood as a natural part of the design process.
In this context, the proposed guidelines summarize and evaluate the main strategies and principles
that need to be integrated throughout various design methods phases to ensure that sustainability
principles are considered in the architectural design process [45]. Each guideline was given a
recommendation level, outlined in Table A2, to specify the degree of importance of implementing each
strategy. Moreover, additional specifications for certain guidelines have been included for further
explanations or suggestions where necessary.
Each strategy has been integrated into one of the four phases of the architectural design method
according to its level of detail. However, the presented guidelines admit multiple interactions and
feedback loops between various design phases according to the thinking process of each architect.
If possible, the architect should always prioritize the implementation of passive strategies.
In addition, the final decisions concerning the implementations of each strategy must be treated
responsibly and adapted to the context of the site.
The structure of the proposed guidelines is presented in Table 2 and the guidelines can be found
in the Table A2 and Supplementary Materials.

Table 2. Guidelines Structure.

Guidelines Structure
Table I. Program and Data Collection
Passive Strategies
i. Site and Climate
ii. Urban Context and Conditions
iii. Adapting the program to the site
iv. Internal consumption and needs
v. Other Criteria
Table II. Feasibility Study
Passive Strategies
i. Siting
ii. Orientation
iii. Form
iv. Envelope
v. Landscape
Table III. Preliminary Design
Passive Strategies
i. Structure
ii. Internal layout
iii. Opening elements
iv. Shading elements
v. Natural Ventilation
vi. Additional energy efficient strategies
Active Strategies
vii. Heating and Cooling Solutions
Table IV. Detailed Design

Passive Strategies
i. Materials Selection
ii. Thermal Insulation Materials
iii. Construction Details
iv. Water Fixtures
v. Building Management
Active Strategies
vi. Low Consumption Devices Selection
Buildings 2019, 9, 135 9 of 13

I. Program and Data Collection

The program is the starting point of any architecture project, when the general requirements of
the overall design are defined. To guarantee the sustainability of the project, the architect should
consider the bioclimatic characteristics of the site [46–48] as well as the best energy efficiency strategies
and the possibility for potable water conservation. Impermeabilized areas should be minimized and
adapted to the profile and number of users, functions of the future building and typology of spaces in
order to reduce damage in ecosystems and natural resources. It is also important to estimate internal
consumption and needs of the future building and to study other significant criteria concerning social,
cultural and economic context.
II. Feasibility Study
The feasibility phase is crucial to ensure energy efficiency, since it determines how the building is
formally integrated in the surrounding environment. Issues such as orientation and form, determined
in this phase, will have a huge impact on the energy performance of the building in the operation
phase. Therefore, it is important to prioritize daylighting, natural ventilation and passive design
solutions for heating and cooling, using mass, landscaping and design to work with topography and
climate [46,47,49].
III. Preliminary Design
In the preliminary design phase, the design team experiments with internal layout, dimensioning
of areas and heights, and elements regarding the envelope of the building as opening elements and
shading systems. These decisions are key determinants for the energy efficiency of the building.
Active strategies for heating and cooling systems, powered by renewable resources, should
also be addressed so that such systems can form an integral part of the building and the use of
prefabrication [50].
IV. Detail Design
In the detail design phase, final considerations are decided regarding the layout and dimension of
interior spaces. Materials and finishing materials, water fixtures, electrical equipment and artificial
lighting are selected. This phase is still very important for the implementation of sustainability since
these strategies will have a great impact on acoustic comfort, indoor air quality, energy efficiency and
durability of the building. Moreover, water fixtures choice will impact potable water conservation [51].
The previous guideline structure defines a contribution for a more sustainable solution of
architecture design, that can be achieved through management of many principles that should be
considered and integrated in the project by the creation of more holistic approach [52].
The results show that there will be a positive impact on this relevant theme about guidelines on
sustainable design architecture.

6. Conclusions
Sustainability can be understood as a set of ethical values based on social, environmental and
economic responsibility. Through these values, it is possible to reach sustainable development, which,
should urgently emerge to replace the current development model of societies.
The practice of architecture is a driver to achieve sustainable development, yet most architects do
not address this issue in their projects. The study of architectural design methods reveals the need
for a new, simpler, multidisciplinary model that implements sustainability within the design process.
An evaluation of the sustainability component in the design process who is often nonexistent among
architects or it lacks a systematic and theoretically based evaluation methods. This understanding
highlights the results of the survey where almost half (49.3%) of the survey respondents stated that the
Systematic methods with theoretical foundations adapted to architectural design process was the best
one even though approximately a third (31.8%) of them admitted not knowing.
Buildings 2019, 9, 135 10 of 13

In response to this need, an evaluation system was developed, formalized in guidelines, which
were structured according to the phases of the architectural design process. These guidelines inform
architects of the main strategies required to achieve sustainability goals as well as to optimize the
design process.
The guidelines are also suitable for determining whether a building contributes for
sustainable development.
Furthermore, the aim to raise awareness regarding the sustainability in the field of architecture still
very rarely implemented. Thus, the proposed system suggests a transition from a theoretical concept
to one that can be practiced and conducted to the implementation of a more sustainable architecture
design with strategies and tools in practice, and with support from informative guidelines built for
architects and other technics and stakeholders.
The guidelines raise several possibilities for future developments and adaptations by the architects.
They can evolve into an interactive model in the form of a checklist, which helps to reduce the error
and the risk in the decision phase. In addition, the content of the guidelines could be further developed
and expanded to include other sustainability indicators more focused on the social and economic
dimensions of sustainability.
Another outcome would be the computerization of the developed tool or its incorporation in a 3D
design software for architecture. This would allow the design team to more accurately evaluate the
implementation of sustainability principles while developing technical drawings and visualizations.
Such evaluations would not only include the assessment of energy performance of a building, as it is
already done by several software programs, but also other key indicators of sustainability.

Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at http://www.mdpi.com/2075-5309/9/5/135/s1,

Table S1: PROGRAM AND DATA COLLECTION; Table S2: FEASIBILITY STUDY; Table S3: PRELIMINARY
DESIGN, Table S4: DETAIL DESIGN.
Author Contributions: Concept and development of research, M.F.; concept, structure of the research method
and revision of the text, M.A.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Appendix A
Table A1. Statistics of respondents.

1. Clarify your professional situation:

Answer Ratio
Architecture student. 32.3%
Architect and is responsible for designing projects. 37.3%
Architect and collaborates in the design of projects. 22.1%
Architect but does not practice the profession. 8.3%
2. Do you think that the concept of sustainability should be contemplated during architecture design process?
Answer Ratio
Yes. 100%
No. 0%
3. How do you evaluate the implementation of sustainability in your projects during the design process?
Answer Ratio
I evaluate empirically. 45.6%
I use an evaluation system developed by me or my team. 13.8%
I use commercial evaluation systems (i.e., LiderA, LEED, BREEAM, CASBEE). 7.8%
I do not evaluate. 30.0%
Other. 2.8%
Buildings 2019, 9, 135 11 of 13

Table A1. Cont.

4. In your opinion, are commercial sustainability assessment and certification systems (i.e., LEED, BREEAM,
CASBEE) adequate to support the design phase of the project?
Answer Ratio
Yes. 25.8%
No. 2.3%
I do not know. 71.9%
5. Which of the following methods do you consider most effective to ensure the implementation of
sustainability into the architectural design process?
Answer Ratio
Empirical methods. 3.7%
Systematic methods with theoretical foundations adapted to architectural design process. 49.3%
Sustainability commercial evaluation systems (i.e., LiderA, LEED, BREEAM, CASBEE). 13.8%
I do not know. 31.8%
Other method. 1.4%
6. Please add any comments on what you consider necessary for developing guidelines to a sustainable project.
Answer Ratio
Open answers 97.0%

Table A2. Levels of Recommendations for Guidelines for a sustainable project.

Levels of Recommendations
Is recommended
Should be considered
May be considered

References
1. Anink, D.; Boonstra, C.; Mak, J. Handbook of Sustainable Building: An Environmental Preference Method for
Selection of Materials for Use in Construction and Refurbishment; James & James: London, UK, 1996; p. 8.
2. Edwards, B.; Hyett, P. Guía Básica de la Sostenibilidad (Basic Guide to Sustainability); Editorial Gustavo Gili:
Barcelona, Spain, 2004.
3. UIA The International Union of Architects. Changing Architectural Education for Reaching Sustainable Future:
A Contribution to the Discussion. 2011. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/270464664_
Changing_architectural_education_For_reaching_sustainable_future_A_contribution_to_the_discussion
(accessed on 1 November 2018).
4. IEA. Tracking Clean Energy Progress 2017: Excerpt Informing Energy Sector Transformations. OECD
Countries: International Energy Agency. 2017, pp. 54–57. Available online: https://www.iea.org/publications/
freepublications/publication/TrackingCleanEnergyProgress2017.pdf (accessed on 2 August 2018).
5. United Nations Environment and IEA. Towards a Zero-Emission, Efficient, and Resilient Buildings and
Construction Sector. Global Status Report 2017. Available online: http://www.worldgbc.org/sites/default/
files/UNEP188_GABC_en%28web%29.pdf (accessed on 20 August 2018).
6. Amado, M.; Ramalhete, I.; Freitas, J.C.; Amado, A.R.; Silva, A. Towards the Sustainable City: A Model to
Transform the Informal into Formal. In Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, Ecosystems and Sustainable
Development XI; WIT: Wessex, UK, 2017.
7. Roser, M.; Ortiz-Ospina, E. Global Extreme Poverty. 2017. Available online: https://ourworldindata.org/
extreme-poverty (accessed on 25 May 2018).
8. WCED. Our Common Future. World Commission on Environment and Development; Oxford University Press:
Oxford, UK, 1987.
9. Kibert, C. The next generation of sustainable construction. Build. Res. Inf. 2007, 35, 595–601. [CrossRef]
10. Amado, M.; Reaes Pinto, A.; Alcafache, A.; Ramalhete, I. Construção Sustentável: Conceito e Prática;
Caleidoscopio, Casal de Cambra: Lisboa, Portugal, 2015. (In Portuguese)
Buildings 2019, 9, 135 12 of 13

11. Osmani, M.; Glass, J.; Price, A.D.F. Architects’ perspectives on construction waste reduction by design.
Waste Manag. 2008, 28, 1147–1158. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
12. Pitt, M.; Tucker, M.; Riley, M.; Longden, J. Towards sustainable construction: Promotion and best practices.
Construct. Innov. Inf. Process Manag. 2009, 9, 201–224. [CrossRef]
13. Hastings, R.; Wall, M. Sustainable Solar Housing, Vol I: Strategies and Solutions; Earthscan: London, UK, 2007;
pp. 37–46.
14. Berardi, U. Sustainability Assessment in the Construction Sector: Rating Systems and Rated Buildings.
Sustain. Dev. 2011, 20, 411–424. [CrossRef]
15. Lamorgese, L.; Geneletti, D. Sustainability Principles in Strategic Environmental Assessment: A Framework
for Analysis and Examples from Italian Urban Planning. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2013, 42, 116–126.
[CrossRef]
16. Ding, G. Sustainable construction: The role of environmental assessment tools. J. Environ. Manag. 2008, 86,
451–464. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
17. Kim, D.; Dong, K.; Lee, J.; Shin, J.; Chung, H.; Jo, H. A development of a simplified energy assessment tool
for residential buildings. Int. Conf. Sustain. Build. Asia 2013, 446, 217–225.
18. Markelj, J.; Kuzman, M.; Grošelj, P.; Zbašnik-Senegačnik, M. A simplified method for evaluating building
sustainability in the early design phase for architects. Sustainability 2014, 6, 8775–8795. [CrossRef]
19. Bergman, D. Sustainable Design: A Critical Guide; Princeton Architectural Press: New York, NY, USA, 2011;
ISBN 978-1568989419.
20. Guy, S.; Farmer, G. Reinterpreting Sustainable Architecture: The Place of Technology. J. Archit. Educ. 2011,
54, 140–148. [CrossRef]
21. Kanters, J.; Horvat, M.; Dubois, M. Tools and methods used by architects for solar design. Energy Build. 2014,
68, 721–731. [CrossRef]
22. Han, J.H.; Kim, S.S. Architectural Professionals’ Needs and Preferences for Sustainable Building Guidelines
in Korea. Sustainability 2014, 6, 8379–8397. [CrossRef]
23. Truta, C.; Parv, L.; Topala, I. Academic Engagement and Intention to Drop Out: Levers for Sustainability in
Higher Education. Sustainability 2018, 10, 4637. [CrossRef]
24. Lopes, A.C.; Farinha, J.; Amado, M. Sustainability through Art, International Conference on Technologies and
Materials for Renewable Energy, Environment and Sustainability; TMREES 2017; Energy Procedia; Salame, C.-T.,
Aillerie, M., Panagiotis, P., Eds.; Elsevier Science BV: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2017; Volume 119,
pp. 752–766.
25. Leal, F.W.; Raath, S.; Lazzarini, B.; Vargas, V.R.; de Souza, L.; Anholone, R.; Quelhas, O.L.G.; Haddad, R.;
Klavins, M.; Orlovici, V.L. The role of transformation in learning and education for Sustainability. J. Clean.
Prod. 2018, 199, 286–295. [CrossRef]
26. Brophy, V.; Lewis, O.J. A Green Vitruvius Principles and Practice of Sustainable Architectural Design; Routledge:
London, UK, 2011.
27. Bay, J.; Ong, B. Tropical Sustainable Architecture: Social and Environmental Dimensions; Architectural Press:
Oxford, MS, USA, 2006; pp. 15–27.
28. Plowright, P.D. Revealing Architectural Design: Methods, Frameworks and Tools; Routledge: New York, NY, USA,
2014; pp. 1–69.
29. Hudson, B.; Galloway, T.; Kaufman, J. Comparison of current planning theories: Counterparts and
contradictions. J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 1979, 45, 387–398. [CrossRef]
30. Næss, P. Normative Planning Theory and Sustainable Development. Scand. Hous. Plan. Res. 1994, 11,
145–167. [CrossRef]
31. Moughtin, C.; Rafael, C.; Sarris, C.; Signoretta, P. Urban Design: Method and Techniques; Architectural Press:
Oxford, MS, USA, 1999.
32. Watson, D.; Plattus, A.J.; Shibley, R.G.; Watson, D. (Eds.) Time-Saver Standards for Urban. Design; McGraw-Hill:
New York, NY, USA, 2003.
33. Amado, M. Planeamento Urbano Sustentável; Editorial Caleidoscopio Casal de Cambra: Lisboa, Portugal, 2005.
(In Portuguese)
34. Lawson, B. How Designers Think: The Design Process Demystified, 4th ed.; Architectural Press: Oxford, MS,
USA, 2005.
35. Ryan, C. Traditional Construction for a Sustainable Future; Routledge: Abingdon, UK, 2011.
Buildings 2019, 9, 135 13 of 13

36. Appleton, J.J.; Christenson, S.L.; Furlong, M.J. Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and
methodological issues of the construct. Psychol. Sch. 2008, 45, 369–386. [CrossRef]
37. Park, J.; Yoon, J.; Kim, K.H. Critical Review of the Material Criteria of Building Sustainability Assessment
Tools. Sustainability 2017, 9, 186. [CrossRef]
38. Bernardi, E.; Carlucci, S.; Cornaro, C.; Bohne, R. An Analysis of the Most Adopted Rating Systems for
Assessing the Environmental Impact of Buildings. Sustainability 2017, 9, 1226. [CrossRef]
39. Lucas, V.; Amado, M.P. Advantages of the Certification of Sustainable Construction. In Proceedings of
the 1st International Conference on Building Sustainability Assessment, Porto, Portugal, 23–25 May 2012;
Amôeda, R., Mateus, R., Bragança, L., Pinheiro, C., Eds.; Green Lines Institute for Sustainable Development:
Porto, Portugal, 2012. ISBN 978-989-95671-7-7.
40. John, G.; Clements-Croome, D.; Jeronimidis, G. Sustainable building solutions: A review of lessons from
natural world. Build. Environ. 2005, 40, 319–328. [CrossRef]
41. Bunz, K.R.; Henze, G.P.; Tiller, D.K. Survey of Sustainable Building Design Practices in North America,
Europe, and Asia. J. Archit. Eng. 2006, 12, 33–62. [CrossRef]
42. National Institute of Building Sciences [NIBS]. Whole Building Design Guide (WBDG); National Institute of
Building Sciences: Washington, DC, USA, 2014; Available online: https://www.wbdg.org/ffc/nibs (accessed
on 20 August 2018).
43. Ofei-Manu, P.; Didham, R.J. Identifying the factors for sustainability learning performance. J. Clean. Prod.
2018, 198, 1173–1184. [CrossRef]
44. Jensen, S.R.; Kamari, A.; Strange, A.; Kirkegaard, P.H. Towards a holistic approach to retrofitting: A critical
review of state-of-the-art evaluation methodologies for architectural transformation. In Proceedings of the
WSBE 2017 (World Sustainable Built Environment) Conference, Hong Kong, China, 5–7 June 2017.
45. Potbhare, V.; Syal, M.; Kormaz, S. Adoption of Green Building Guidelines in Developing Countries Based on
U.S.; India Experiences. J. Green. Build. 2009, 4, 158–174. [CrossRef]
46. Brown, G.Z.; DeKay, M. Sun, Wind & Light: Architectural Design Strategies, 2nd ed.; Jonh Wiley & Sons:
New York, NY, USA, 2001.
47. Olgyay, V. Design with Climate: Bioclimatic Approach to Architectural Regionalism; Princeton University Press:
Princeton, NJ, USA; Oxford, MS, USA, 2015.
48. Akadiri, P.O.; Chinyio, E.A.; Olomolaiye, P.O. Design of A Sustainable Building: A Conceptual Framework
for Implementing Sustainability in the Building Sector. Buildings 2012, 2, 126–152. [CrossRef]
49. Cofaigh, E.; Olley, J.; Lewis, J. The Climatic Dwelling: An Introduction to Climate-Responsive Residential
Architecture; James & James: London, UK, 1996.
50. Veira, N.; Amado, M.; Pinho, F. Prefabricated solution to modular construction in Cape Verde. In Proceedings
of the Technologies and Materials For Renewable Energy, Environment and Sustainability: Tmrees16-Cnam,
Paris, France, 16–18 November 2016; Salame, C.-T., Ferroud, C., Descombes, G., Aillerie, M., Faucheux, S.,
Eds.; AIP Conference Proceedings: College Park, MD, USA, 2016; Volume 1814, ISBN 978-0-7354-1482-2.
[CrossRef]
51. Das, O.; Bera, P.; Moulick, S. Water Conservation Aspects of Green Buildings. Int. J. Res. Eng. Technol. 2015,
4, 75–79.
52. Shan, M.; Hwang, B.G. Green Building rating systems: Global reviews of practices and research efforts.
Sustain. Cities Soc. 2018, 39, 172–180. [CrossRef]

© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).