Afful, A E; Ayarkwa, J; Acquah, G K K and Osei-Asibey, D (2023) Enablers of incorporating indoor environmental quality (IEQ) principles into buildings. Smart and Sustainable Built Environment, 12(1), pp. 38-59. ISSN 2046-6099
Abstract
Purpose: The aim of this study was to identify these enablers in literature and subsume them under broad categories for the development of a framework showing the interrelationships among the enablers. Design/methodology/approach: Fifty-four (54) relevant articles were desk reviewed from different construction peer-reviewed journals and published conference proceedings to identify 20 core enablers of incorporating indoor environmental quality (IEQ) into building designs. Findings: The identified enablers include improved occupants' health, well-being and satisfaction, environmental conservation, high return on investments and co-operative methods of design and construction management among others. To better understand the enablers identified, they were classified into seven main interconnected categories: economic enablers, environmental enablers, occupant and end-user enablers, process enablers, corporate image, culture and vision enablers, client-related enablers and external enablers. Research limitations/implications: The interconnectedness brought to the fore a subtler appreciation of the drivers of IEQ, which could help expand current knowledge outside the narrow scope of isolated drivers. The fact that the papers selected in this study are not limited geographically underscores the wide applicability of the findings to the global construction industry. Practical implications: Understanding that the enablers will enhance the adoption and design of quality indoor environments, help in building the capacity of consultants to adopt the design of quality IEs and reduce the impact of construction on the environment. Social implications: These identified enablers are not limited geographically and thus could promote the design of quality indoor environments globally, particularly in green building design. To the global construction community, this review presents a list of enablers that would expedite the adoption of principles of IEQ designs in buildings thus taking the global construction industry one more step towards sustainable built forms. Promoting the identified enablers would ultimately steer stakeholders to design and build better indoor environments. Originality/value: The fact that the papers selected in this study are not limited geographically underscores the wide applicability of the findings to the global construction industry.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | enablers; Ghana; green buildings; indoor environmental quality |
| Index terms: | green building, well-being, methodology, design and build, built form, journal, return on investment, design and construction, indoor environmental quality, global construction, operative, conservation, satisfaction, building design, Ghana, indoor environment, conference |
| Subjects: | environmental health, design practice, urban form and morphology, research methods, Geography, environmental policy, environmental science, contractual arrangements, economic analysis, architectural design, project delivery, strategic management, research dissemination and communication, mental health and wellbeing, practitioner |
| Topics: | International Construction, Urban Studies, Design Practice, Sustainability, Procurement, Roles and Professions, Project Management, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Health and Safety, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here