MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3186775644 · doi:10.18280/ijdne.160303

Defining Sustainability in Afghanistan’s Built Environment: A Case Study of World Bank Building in Kabul and Comparative Analysis of Prominent Literature

2021· article· en· W3186775644 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mahsa Khatibi, Khairul Anwar Mohamed Khaidzir, Aiman Mohd Rashid

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSustainable Building Design and Assessment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversiti Teknologi Malaysia
KeywordsSustainabilityBuilt environmentSustainable developmentSustainable designArchitectural engineeringRealmEnvironmental resource managementEngineeringBusinessEnvironmental planningCivil engineeringPolitical scienceGeographyEcologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The built environment is one of the critical areas of intervention for sustainable development. This study aims to investigate the sustainable and appropriate ways of designing Afghanistan’s built environment. To put forward a reliable mechanism of research, the study develops and uses three approaches. The first is to review the sustainable strategies applied in the design of the country’s first LEED-certified building, the World Bank Building in Kabul (WBBK). Secondly to understand the main concepts involved in the practice of designing for sustainability by analyzing five of the most influential books in the realm of design and sustainability. Finally, the findings from the review of the five books are reinforced with more literature associated with design and sustainability to analyze and evaluate the sustainable strategies of the WBBK. The study posits that although the building can promote the idea of a sustainable built environment in the country but there are several issues. Among the issues are, (1) Its high dependence on eco-technologies to reduce environmental impact rather than designing in relation to social and ecological systems, (2) Its insufficiency in providing a resilient design that is self-sufficient, flexible, and adaptive, and (3) Its lack of creating aesthetic experiences and cultural meaning for its occupants which are required for future designs and development. Furthermore, based on the findings and upon inquiring into the sustainable design of WBBK, the paper concluded with a set of recommendations to contribute towards the design of a sustainable built environment in Afghanistan.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score0.603

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Design & Nature and EcodynamicsSame topicSustainable Building Design and AssessmentFrench-language works237,207