1. Motivation
Sustainability is increasingly recognized as a cornerstone of contemporary architectural discourse, central to the mission of this journal. However, the term “sustainability” often becomes abstracted from the tangible realities it aims to address [1]. In discussing a sustainable built environment, we are fundamentally engaging with the design choices that shape buildings, influencing their character and performance over time. Factors such as a project’s alignment with its climate, the movement of light and air, user comfort, and even the functionality of façades are all deeply intertwined with architectural planning [2]. These considerations cannot be distilled into mere technical calculations or relegated to disciplines that evaluate efficiency or environmental impact in isolation. Rather, architecture synthesizes these elements into coherent spatial and cultural narratives.
This understanding is the driving force behind our new Section, “Sustainable Design and Building Performance.” We acknowledge that the environmental challenges confronting our built environment today—including climate change, resource depletion, urbanization pressures, and social inequity—demand responses that are not only technically sound but also culturally resonant. Buildings are not mere collections of materials; they are lived environments that shape human experience, embody cultural values, and mediate our relationship with the natural world. To design sustainably is thus to navigate a complex web of performance criteria, user needs, technological advancements, and ecological responsibilities [3].
2. The Expanding Scope of Building Performance
The concept of building performance has undergone significant transformation over the past two decades. Initially focused on energy efficiency, it has now broadened to encompass thermal comfort, indoor air quality, daylighting, acoustics, and the psychological and physiological well-being of occupants [4,5]. Moreover, we are increasingly considering building performance at the urban scale—examining how structures interact with microclimates, influence urban heat islands, and enhance the quality of outdoor public spaces [6]. This evolution reflects a growing recognition that buildings do not exist in isolation; they are integral components of larger ecological and social systems.
Despite these advancements, a persistent gap remains between design aspirations and actual performance outcomes. Buildings that promise high performance often fall short once occupied. This performance gap is not just a technical issue; it is fundamentally a design challenge. It underscores the need for a more profound integration of performance thinking in the earliest design stages, enhanced simulation and optimization tools, and effective feedback mechanisms that help designers learn from post-occupancy data [7,8]. Recognizing buildings as dynamic systems that respond to evolving conditions and user behaviors over time is essential to bridging this gap [9].
3. Toward a Regenerative Built Environment
As we face the realities of climate change and resource scarcity, the ambition of sustainable design must evolve from simply minimizing harm to actively regenerating ecological and social systems [10]. This vision necessitates a radical rethinking of our approach to design, construction, and habitation. We must strive for architectures that are not only efficient but restorative—those that foster biodiversity, sequester carbon, generate more energy than they consume, and enhance the health and well-being of communities [11].
Emerging concepts such as positive energy buildings, net-zero energy buildings (NZEBs), and communities of prosumers—individuals and groups that both produce and consume energy—illustrate the potential of regenerative design [12,13]. This approach encourages the integration of renewable energy sources, innovative materials, and sustainable construction methods, while also prioritizing the social fabric of communities. Buildings can become active participants in their ecosystems, supporting both human and environmental health [14].
Achieving this vision requires new collaborative frameworks among architects, engineers, ecologists, social scientists, and policymakers. Innovation in materials, construction techniques, and building technologies is essential, as is a deeper engagement with the cultural and ethical dimensions of sustainability [15]. The built environment must be understood not only as a technical system but also as a reflection of our societal values and aspirations.
4. An Invitation to Contribute
This section is intended as a platform for the most innovative and impactful research in sustainable design and building performance. We welcome scholars, practitioners, and researchers from around the globe to contribute work that pushes the boundaries of knowledge in this critical field. Our commitment to rigorous peer review and fostering constructive dialog among diverse perspectives will ensure that the research disseminated through this section has the potential to influence both academic discourse and professional practice.
Whether your work focuses on the micro-scale of material performance or the macro-scale of urban climate adaptation, whether it employs computational simulation or ethnographic observation, or whether it proposes groundbreaking technologies or revitalizes vernacular wisdom—if it advances our understanding of how design can enhance the performance of the built environment, we eagerly invite you to share your insights with us. Together, let us shape the future of sustainable architecture and building performance, embracing the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead.
Data Availability Statement
Data available on requests.
Conflicts of Interest
The author declares no conflict of interest.
References
- Garcés, G.; Montalbán-Domingo, L.; Sanz-Benlloch, A. Construction 4.0 technologies and their contribution to sustainability in building construction: A comprehensive and comparative assessment. J. Build. Eng. 2026, 118, 115004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Poorisat, T.; Aigwi, I.E.; Doan, D.T.; GhaffarianHoseini, A. Unlocking the potentials of sustainable building designs and practices: A Systematic Review. Build. Environ. 2024, 266, 112069. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Butt, A.N.; Dimitrijević, B. A Transdisciplinary Overlay for Nature-Based Design of Sustainable Buildings. Architecture 2024, 4, 1157–1189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Cai, S.; Li, L.; Gou, Z. Optimizing open-plan office passive retrofits: A human-centric, climate-adaptive approach to lighting, thermal comfort, and energy savings. Build. Environ. 2026, 287, 113894. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Wang, Q.; Gao, W.; Su, Y.; Cheng, H. Green Building Performance Analysis and Energy-Saving Design Strategies in Dalian, China. Sustainability 2024, 16, 5233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Wang, Y.; Gou, Z. Evaluating urban heat mitigation strategies: Microclimate effects and energy consumption in residential areas across diverse climates. Energy Build. 2025, 343, 115950. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Pons-Valladares, O.; Nikolic, J. Sustainable Design, Construction, Refurbishment and Restoration of Architecture: A Review. Sustainability 2020, 12, 9741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Zheng, Z.; Zhou, J.; Jiaqin, Z.; Yang, Y.; Xu, F.; Liu, H. Review of the building energy performance gap from simulation and building lifecycle perspectives: Magnitude, causes and solutions. Dev. Built Environ. 2024, 17, 100345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Zwolińska-Glądys, K.; Łuczak, R.; Życzkowski, P.; Kuczera, Z.; Borowski, M. Sustainable Performance Building Design as a Driver of Post-Industrial Urban Transformation: Case Studies from Katowice, Poland. Appl. Sci. 2025, 15, 12061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Saqib, Z.A.; Ikram, M.; Berg, D. Converting green into good: Pathways from green building practices to social well-being. J. Environ. Manag. 2026, 399, 128621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Yang, X.; Gou, Z.; Chau, H.-W. A decision framework for multi-dimensional analysis of roof retrofit scenarios to mitigate urban heat Island effects and enhance energy efficiency. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2025, 130, 106591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Ding, L.; Cai, S.; Gou, Z. Reinforcing positive energy districts for community resilience: A literature review and framework proposal. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2025, 127, 104199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Cai, S.; Gou, Z. Defining the energy role of buildings as flexumers: A review of definitions, technologies, and applications. Energy Build. 2024, 303, 113821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Liu, Y.; Zhang, J.; Huang, Q.; Asutosh, A.T.; Zhang, H. Evaluation analysis on the life cycle assessment of new zero-carbon buildings from the perspectives of energy storage and ecology. J. Build. Eng. 2025, 116, 114669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Mandičák, T.; Spišáková, M.; Mésároš, P. Sustainable Design and Building Information Modeling of Construction Project Management towards a Circular Economy. Sustainability 2024, 16, 4376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2026 by the author. 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.