All Issue

2017 Vol.8, Issue 2 Preview Page
An analytical approach towards sustainability-centered guidelines for Dutch primary school building design
Ronald de Vrieze1*
,
Henri C. Moll2
,
1School of Architecture, Built Environment & Civil Engineering, Hanze University Groningen
2Faculty of Science and Engineering, University of Groningen
*교신저자. *Corresponding Author. 
June 2017. pp. 93-124
PDF XML Citation
Abstract

Societal one-way directed approaches of sustainable primary school building design cause persistent physical building problems. It affects the performances of the societal challenge of designing real sustainable school buildings, as well as the educational and social processes, and its end-user performances. Conventional building construction approaches build traditionally their designs on a syntheses of dialogues and consensus during decision-making processes, due to a variety of different interests. Principals define their ambitions and requirements into a team of mainly technical domain related disciplines. There are no design methods available that connect human systems and ecosystems integrated and balance the dynamic multi-level scaled mechanisms of human needs and sustainability development factors. The presented analytic framework recognizes similarity patterns between these multi-level scaled social systems, ecosystems and sustainable development entities, qualitatively as well as quantitatively. It delivers a new polarity based dynamic system that contributes to the client briefs and physical building morphological factors from a more sustainable development base. This theoretical approach establishes Sustainability-Centered Guidelines for primary schools (SCGs) design and building.

Keywords
architectural design process
sustainable design
sustainability
school buildings
indoor environment

References
1
H. Korbee and I. Thijssen, Krachtenveldanalyse verduurzamen schoolgebouwen PO en  VO. Dutch Report, 2014. Available at  http://www.rvo.nl/file/krachtenveldanalyse-verduurzamen-schoolgebouwen-po-en-vo.
2
Rijksoverheid, Milieuprestaties van gebouwen meten, 2016. Available at https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/ duurzaam-bouwen-en-verbouwen/inhoud/duurzaam-bouwen/milieuprestaties-van-gebouwen-meten.
3
M.W. van Wetering, Technologiekompas voor het onderwijs Kennisnet Trendrapport 2016-2017. Report. Stichting Kennisnet, Zoetermeer, 2016. Available at https://www.kennisnet.nl/fileadmin/kennisnet/publicatie/ trendrapport/Technologiekompas_voor_het_onderwijs_Kennisnet_Trendrapport_2016_2017.pdf.
4
OECD, Schooling Redesigned: Towards Innovative Learning Systems, Educational Research and Innovation, Report OECD Publishing, Paris, 2015. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264245914-en.
5
OECD, Trends Shaping Education 2016, Report OECD Publishing, Paris, 2016. Available at http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1787/trendsedu-2016-en.
6
SURF, Trend report 2016, how technological trends enable customized education”. Report. 2016. Available at https://www.surf.nl/en/knowledge-base/2016/trendreport-2016-how-technological-trends-enable-customised-education.html.
7
A.L. Dahl, Achievement and gaps in indicators for sustainability, Ecology Indicators 17 (2012), pp. 14-19.
8
L. Koskela, Is a theory of the built environment needed? Building Research & Information. 36 (2008), pp. 211-215.
9
G. Grün and S. Urlaub, Impact of the indoor environment on learning in schools in Europe, Study Report, Fraunhofer-Institut für Bauphysik IBP, Stuttgart, 2015. Available at http://www.buildup.eu/en/practices/ publications/impact-indoor-environment-learning-schools-europe-0
10
OECD, Netherlands 2016: Foundations for the Future, Report OECD Publishing, Paris, 2016. Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264257658-en
11
W. Zeiler, G. Boxem, and M. de Waard, Sustainable School Buildings: Some of the Latest Dutch Examples of Nearly Zero Emissions Buildings, Conference article for Enhanced Building Operations, Manchester, UK, 2012. Available at http://oaktrust.library.tamu.edu/bitstream/handle/1969.1/148922/ESL-IC-12-10-29.pdf?sequence=1.
12
UNICEF, Child Well-being in Rich Countries: A comparative overview. Innocenti Report Card 11, UNICEF Office of Research, Florence, 2013.
13
PBL, De Toekomst Is Nu, Dutch Report Planbureau voor de leefomgeving, Gildeprint, Enschede 2014. Available at http://themasites.pbl.nl/balansvandeleefomgeving/jaargang-2014/conclusies/de-toekomst-is-nu
14
UNU, Bündnis Entwicklung Hilft und United Nations University-Institute for Environment and Human Security, (UNU-EHS), Report 2015. Available at http://www.entwicklung-hilft.de/fileadmin/user_upload/downloads/Publikationen/ WeltRisikoBericht_2015.pdf.
15
F. Jalaei and A. Jrade, Integrating building information modeling (BIM) and LEED system at the conceptual design stage of sustainable buildings. Sustainable Cities and Society 18 (2016), pp. 95-107.
16
G.E. Marjaba and S.E. Chidiac, Sustainability and resiliency metrics for buildings-Critical review. Building and Environment 101 (2016), pp.116-125.
17
A. Payman and C. Searcy, An analysis of metrics used to measure performance in green and sustainable supply chains, Journal of Cleaner Production 86 (2015), pp.360-377.
18
D. Chang, C.K.M. Lee, and C.H. Chen, Review of life cycle assessment towards sustainable product development. Journal of Cleaner Production 83 (2014), pp. 48-60.
19
W. Buddensick, Fractale Schularchitektur, in Schularchitektur im Interdisziplinären Diskurs J. Böhme, ed., VS Verlag, Wiesbaden, (2009), pp. 315-329.
20
T. Mock and T. Wernke, Like Life Itself, Sustainable Development is Fractal, Sustainable Land Development Initiative (2011), Available at http://www.triplepundit.com/2011/01/like-life-sustainable-development-fractal/#
21
A.G. Lisi and J.O. Weatherall, A Geometric Theory of Everything. Scientific American 23 (2014), pp. 96-103.
22
F.J. Aguilar, Scanning the Business Environment, McMillan, New York, 1967.
23
M. Morrison, The PEST or PESTLE Analysis in Schools & Education, (2007) Available at https://rapidbi. com/pestle/
24
J. Scheerder, R. Hoogerwerf, and S. de Wilde, Horizonscan 2050. Dutch Report, Study Centre for Technology Trends (STT), The Hague, 2014. Available at http://stt.nl/horizonscan/
25
S. Derissen, M.F. Quaas, and S. Baumgärtner, The relationship between resilience and sustainability of ecological-economic systems. Ecological Economics 70 (2011), pp. 1121-1128.
26
L. Xu, D. Marinova, and X. Guo, Resilience thinking : a renewed system approach for sustainability science. IR3S, Integrated Research System for Sustainable Science 10 (2015), pp. 123-138.
27
A. Robbins, Why We Do What We Do, 2016. Available at https://www.tonyrobbins.com/podcast/why-we-do- what-we-do/.
28
R. de Vrieze and H.C. Moll, Crisis in Dutch primary school-building design solved by paradigm shift? Intelligent Buildings International. 7 (2015), pp. 36-60. 
29
L. Wastiels, H.N.J. Schifferstein, I. Wouters, and A. Heylighen, Touching materials visually: about the dominance of vision in building material assessment. International Journal of Design. 7 (2013), pp. 31-41. 
30
R.C.L., The Ultimate Paradigm Shift, School of Wisdom, 2010. Available at http://www.fractalwisdom.com/ science-of-chaos/the-ultimate-paradigm-shift/
31
J.M. Anderies, Embedding built environments in social-ecological systems: resilience-based design principles. Building Research & Information. 42 (2013), pp. 130-142.
32
H.E. Daly, Towards some operational principles of sustainable development. Ecological Economics 2 (1990), pp. 1-6.
33
H. Heinrichs, P. Martens, G. Michelsen, and A. Wiek, eds, Sustainability Science: an introduction. Springer, Dordrecht, 2016.
34
[34]L.A. Venhoeven, J.W. Bolderdijk, and L. Steg, Explaining the paradox: How pro-environmental behaviour can both thwart and foster well-being, Sustainability, 5 (2013), pp. 1372-1386.
35
R.S. Snelgar, Egoistic, altruistic, and biospheric environmental concerns: Measurement and structure. Journal of Environmental Psychology 26 (2006), pp.87-99.
36
U. Hassler and N. Kohler, Resilience in the built environment, Building Research & Information. 42 (2014), pp. 199-129.
37
C. Raudsepp-Hearne, G.D. Peterson, M. Tengö, E.M. Bennett, T. Holland, K. Benessaiah, G.K. MacDonald, and L. Pfeifer, Untangling the environmentalist’s paradox, Bioscience 60 (2010), pp. 576-589.
38
J. Williams, Thinking as Nature: Another Look at Human Excemptionalism, Human Ecology Review. 14 (2007), pp.130-139. Available at http://humanecologyreview.org/pastissues/her142/williams.pdf
39
WELL Building Institute, The Well building standard, Delos Living LLC, New York, 2016.
40
W.L. Paul and P.A. Taylor, A comparison of occupant comfort and satisfaction between a green building and a conventional building, Building and Environment. 43 (2007), pp. 1858-1870.
41
W.D. van Marken Lichtenbelt, J.W. Vanhommerig, N.M. Smulders, B.S. Drossaerts, G.J. Kemerink, N.D. Bouvy, P. Schrauwen, and G.J.J. Teulen, Cold-activated brown adipose tissue in healthy men, The New England Journal of Medicine. 360 (2009), pp. 1500-1508.
42
P. Wargocki, D.P. Wyon, B. Matysiak, and S. Irgens, The effects of classroom air temperature and air supply rate on the performance of school work by children, Proceedings of indoor air 2005, Beijing, Intern. conference on indoor air quality and climate I (2005), pp. 368–372.
43
C.R. Allen, D.G. Angeler, A.S. Garmestani, L.H. Gunderson, and C.S. Holling, Panarchy: Theory and Application, Ecosystems 127 (2014). Available at http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/ncfwrustaff/127
44
L. Gunderson and C.S. Holling, Panarchy: Understanding Transformations in Human and Natural Systems, Island Press, Washington, 2002.
45
J. Fiksel, Sustainability and resilience: towards a systems approach. Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy. 2 (2006), pp. 14-21. Available at http://www.resilience.osu.edu/CFR-site/pdf/0608-028.fiksel.pdf
46
T. McGinley, A morphogenetic architecture for intelligent buildings. Intelligent Buildings International. 7 (2015), pp. 4-15.
47
P. Ott, World and Earth: Hanna Arendt and the Human Relationship to Nature. Ethics, Place, and Environment. 12 (2009), pp.1-16.
48
[48]R. Mitchell, Technology is not enough: climate change, population, affluence, and consumption, The Journal of Environmental Development. 21 (2012), pp. 24-27.
49
[49]A. Kleine and M. von Hauff, Sustainability-Driven Implementation of Corporate Social responsibility: Application of the Integrative Sustainability Triangle, J. Busin. Ethics. 85 (2009), pp. 517-533.
50
N.J. Habraken, The structure of the Ordinary, The MIT press, Cambridge MA, 2000.
51
K. Beadle, A. Gibb, S. Austin, A. Fuster, and P. Madden, Adaptable futures: sustainable aspects of adaptable buildings, Association of Researchers in Construction Management, (2008), pp. 1125-1134. Available at http://www.arcom.ac.uk/-docs/proceedings/ar2008-1125-1134_Beadle_et_al.pdf
52
D. J. Clements-Croome, Intelligent Buildings: An Introduction, Routledge, Abington, 2014.
53
K.H. Robèrt, The natural step story: seeding the next revolution. New Society Publishers, Gabrila Island, Canada, 2002.  
54
M. Missimer, The social dimension of strategic sustainable development. Lic. diss., Blekinge Institute of Technology, 2015.
55
P. Hawken, A. B. Lovins, and L.H. Lovins, Natural capitalism: Creating the next industrial revolution, Little, Brown and Co, Boston, 1999.
56
J.A. Baden and J. Zaffos, Reviews Natural Capitalism:Creating the Next Industrial Revolution, Journal of Markets & Morality. 3 (2000), pp. 261-275. Available at http://www.marketsandmorality.com/index.php/mandm/ article/viewFile/605/595
57
M. Braungart and W. McDonough, Cradle to cradle: Remaking the way we make things, Vintage, London, 2009.
58
P.B. Harzog, Panarchy: Governance in the Network Age. Master Thesis, University of Utah, 2005. Available at http://www.academia.edu/210378/Panarchy_Governance_in_the_Network_Age
59
P. Baudains, S. bishop, P. Duffour, L. Marjanovic-Halburd, S. Psarra, and C. Spataru, A systems paradigm for integrated building design, Intelligent Buildings International. 6 (2014), pp. 201-214.
60
O. Ortiz and F. Castells, Sustainability in the construction industry: a review of recent developments based on LCA. Construction and Building Materials. 23 (2009), pp. 28-39.
Information
  • Publisher :Sustainable Building Research Center (ERC) Innovative Durable Building and Infrastructure Research Center
  • Publisher(Ko) :건설구조물 내구성혁신 연구센터
  • Journal Title :International Journal of Sustainable Building Technology and Urban Development
  • Volume : 8
  • No :2
  • Pages :93-124
  • Received Date : 2017-01-23
  • Accepted Date : 2017-01-23
  • DOI :https://doi.org/10.12972/susb.20170009
Journal Informaiton International Journal of Sustainable Building Technology and Urban Development International Journal of Sustainable Building Technology and Urban Development
Online Submission
  • scopus
  • NRF
  • KOFST
  • KISTI Current Status
  • KISTI Cited-by
  • crosscheck
  • orcid
  • open access
  • ccl
Journal Informaiton Journal Informaiton - close