The Impact of Familiar Implementation and Unusual Artistic Implementation of Recycled Materials in Building Design on People’s Experience and Mental Health

Year 2023, Volume: 2 Issue: 1, 118 - 127, 01.02.2023

Mais Aljunaidy , Mohamad Nadim Adi

Abstract

Building design can impact people’s mental health. Waste negatively affects the environment by polluting the air, water, and soil. Recycling waste in building construction was encouraged to support sustainability. The aim is to provide information about how different ways of executing recycled materials in building design can impact users’ experience and mental health. 173 study participants watched two videos of a house built from recycled materials, which were noticeable as recycled waste in the structure of the building (building A), and a house built from recycled materials but not pronounced as recycled waste (building B). After watching the videos, the participants rated statements in a questionnaire using a 5-point Likert scale (quantitative measure) and answered open-ended questions (qualitative measure). Data were analyzed based on percentages and cross-tabulated to assign qualities to design environments. Descriptive data were organized in tables and figures. Most visitors (81.3%) claimed that touring building B decreased their anxiety and was a relaxing experience compared to what they felt when they were touring building A. Most study participants experienced positive emotions in building B compared to building A. To encourage people to use recycled waste in the construction of their buildings, the final execution of the building should look familiar and avoid giving the feeling that what was used is waste.

Keywords

Recycling, Architecture, Design, Users, Health

References

• Adi, M.N. & Aljunaidy, M.M. (2021). Architectural students’ attitude towards using recycled materials in building design. IDA: International Design and Art Journal, 3, 224-233.
• Aljunaidy, M.M. & Adi, M.N. (2021). Architecture and mental disorders: a systematic study of peer-reviewed literature. HERD: Health Environments Research & Design Journal, 14, 320-330. https://doi.org/10.1177/1937586720973767
• Butera, S., Christensen, T. H. & Astrup, T. F. (2015). Life cycle assessment of construction and demolition waste management. Waste management, 44, 196-205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2015.07.011
• Das, S., Lee, S.-H., Kumar, P., Kim, K.-H., Lee, S. S. & Bhattacharya, S. S. (2019). Solid waste management: Scope and the challenge of sustainability. Journal of cleaner production, 228, 658-678. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.323
• Frontczak, M., Schiavon, S., Goins, J., Arens, E., Zhang, H. & Wargocki, P. (2012). Quantitative relationships between occupant satisfaction and satisfaction aspects of indoor environmental quality and building design. Indoor air, 22(2), 119-131. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0668.2011.00745.x
• Graham, J. (2015). The emotional impact of museum visits. National Portrait Gallery. https://www.npg.org.uk/assets/microsites/makingamark/docs/MaM_students_feel_about_museum_visits.pdf (08.12.2020).
• Kabirifar, K., Mojtahedi, M., Wang, C. & Tam, V. W. (2020). Construction and demolition waste management contributing factors coupled with reduce, reuse, and recycle strategies for effective waste management: A review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 263, 121265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121265
• Karak, T., Bhagat, R. & Bhattacharyya, P. (2012). Municipal solid waste generation, composition, and management: the world scenario. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology, 42(15), 1509-1630. https://doi.org/10.1080/10643389.2011.569871
• Menegaki, M. & Damigos, D. (2018). A review on current situation and challenges of construction and demolition waste management. Current Opinion in Green and Sustainable Chemistry, 13, 8-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogsc.2018.02.010
• Norouzi, N., Shabak, M., Embi, M. R. B. & Khan, T. H. (2015). The architect, the client and effective communication in architectural design practice. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 172, 635-642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.413
• Penn, B. (2020) Mat and Danielle of exploring alternatives, and Mat of exploring alternatives [Video]. Youtube. https://youtu.be/6Hzs9_1ynE0 (04.11 2020).
• Polat, G., Damci, A., Turkoglu, H. & Gurgun, A. P. (2017). Identification of root causes of construction and demolition (C&D) waste: The case of Turkey. Procedia Engineering, 196, 948-955. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.08.035
• Renewable Home By Sbs Australia, Journeyman TV. [Video]. YouTube. https://youtu.be/_yahMHzbGn4 (04.11..2020).
• Sääksjärvi, M. & Hellén, K. (2013). How designers and marketers can work together to support consumers’ happiness. International journal of design, 7(3), 33-44.
• Siva, J. P. S. & London, K. (2011). Investigating the role of client learning for successful architect–client relationships on private single dwelling projects. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 7(3), 177-189. https://doi.org/10.1080/17452007.2011.594570
• Solís-Guzmán, J., Marrero, M., Montes-Delgado, M. V. & Ramírez-De-Arellano, A. (2009). A Spanish model for quantification and management of construction waste. Waste Management, 29(9), 2542-2548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2009.05.009
• Tang, Z., Li, W., Tam, V. W. & Xue, C. (2020). Advanced progress in recycling municipal and construction solid wastes for manufacturing sustainable construction materials. Resources, Conservation & Recycling: X, 6, 100036. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcrx.2020.100036
• Thomson, D. S., Austin, S. A., Devine-Wright, H. & Mills, G. R. (2003). Managing value and quality in design. Building Research & Information, 31(5), 334-345. https://doi.org/10.1080/0961321032000087981
• Vergara, S. E. & Tchobanoglous, G. (2012). Municipal solid waste and the environment: a global perspective. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 37, 277-309. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-050511-122532
• Watson, K. J., Evans, J., Karvonen, A. & Whitley, T. (2016). Re-conceiving building design quality: A review of building users in their social context. Indoor and Built Environment, 25(3), 509-523. https://doi.org/10.1177/1420326X14557550