Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue

Article Menu

Share Help Cite Discuss in SciProfiles

Open AccessReview

Peer-Review Record

Sustainable Building Construction Materials in the United Arab Emirates: A Review

Sustainability 2024, 16(15), 6565; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16156565

by Khalid Mehmood Sadar Din and Md Sayuti Ishak^*

Reviewer 1: Anonymous

Reviewer 2: Anonymous

Reviewer 3:

Yifang Cao

Reviewer 4:

Natalia Ivanovna Kozhukhova

Sustainability 2024, 16(15), 6565; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16156565

Submission received: 29 June 2024 / Revised: 24 July 2024 / Accepted: 29 July 2024 / Published: 31 July 2024

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In this manuscript, the authors intend to have a review on the research and application progress in the sustainable construction materials in UAE. However, the paper was not well written. Several comments are given below:

(1) The abstract should be revised. There are too much contents on the research background. The authors should emphasize the important review work, academic conclusion, and the academic contribution.

(2) In the section of Introduction, the structures should be reconstructed. The development of sustainability for the construction materials in UAE should be introduced. The main kinds for sustainable building construction materials involved in this review should presented. How about the current problem for sustainable construction materials?

(3) In the section 2, no matter the sustainable construction or the sustainable materials, the detailed information should be indicated.

(4) The section of results and discussion should be improved. The important research progress and application on the sustainable construction materials in UAE should be discussed.

(5) The conclusion part should be simplified and rewritten, which should be presented in several item.

(6) As a review paper, there are only 35 papers cited, which is too limited.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Moderate editing of English language is required.

Author Response

For research article: Sustainable Building Construction Materials in the United Arab Emirates: A Review

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments
Summary
Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Please find the detailed responses below and the corresponding revisions/corrections highlighted/in track changes in the re-submitted files.
Comments 1: The abstract should be revised. There are too much contents on the research background. The authors should emphasize the important review work, academic conclusion, and the academic contribution.
Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. I/We agree with this comment. Therefore, I/we have updated the abstract from row 18 to 24 as highlighted in the manuscript.
Comments 2: In the section of Introduction, the structures should be reconstructed. The development of sustainability for the construction materials in UAE should be introduced. The main kinds for sustainable building construction materials involved in this review should presented. How about the current problem for sustainable construction materials?
Response 2: Agree. I/We have, accordingly, added section 1.2 and 1.3 from row 71 to 98 particular focused in the development of sustainable construction materials in the UAE.

Comments 3: In the section 2, no matter the sustainable construction or the sustainable materials, the detailed information should be indicated.

Response 3: Agree. I/We have, accordingly, added information with separate headings 2.1 from row 221 to 250 as highlighted.

Comments 4: The section of results and discussion should be improved. The important research progress and application on the sustainable construction materials in UAE should be discussed.

Response 4: Agree. I/We have, accordingly, I have added information in the section 3 from row 516 to 519.

Comments 5: The conclusion part should be simplified and rewritten, which should be presented in several item.

Response 5: Agree. I/We have, accordingly, revised from rows 570 to 611.

Comments 6: As a review paper, there are only 35 papers cited, which is too limited.

Response 6: Agree. I/We have, accordingly, I have added more references

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This article focuses on sustainable building practices, highlighting their multifaceted impact on the environment, economy, and society. The paper draws on a number of studies emphasizing the key role of sustainable buildings in reducing environmental burdens, improving quality of life, and driving economic prosperity in line with the UN Sustainable Development Goals. However, there is a need to further strengthen coherence between perspectives.

Provide more practical application cases to support the effectiveness of sustainable building materials in reducing CO2 emissions.
Unclear logic and structure of Section 2. The logic and structure of Section 2 need clarification to improve the coherence and flow of the argument.
Specify the methods used for conducting this review, including any systematic or qualitative approaches employed.
Provide details on the number of articles selected for this review, the time span covered, and the keywords used in the search process.
Increase the discussion of life cycle assessment methods to quantify the environmental impact of different building materials.
Clearly identify the role of policies and regulations in promoting sustainable building practices, and provide examples from specific countries or regions.
Explore how socio-economic factors can be integrated with environmental objectives to ensure that sustainable construction simultaneously promotes community well-being and economic growth.
While the article mentions the improvement of indoor air quality from low-VOC materials, it lacks a detailed comparison of the health effects of different VOC limits.
Include more guidelines on how to consider sustainability at the design stage of a building project.
Discuss the differences and adaptability of selecting sustainable materials under different climatic conditions and regions.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing of English language required.

Author Response

For research article: Sustainable Building Construction Materials in the United Arab Emirates: A Review

Response to Reviewer 2 Comments

Summary

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Please find the detailed responses below and the corresponding revisions/corrections highlighted/in track changes in the re-submitted files.

Comments 1: Provide more practical application cases to support the effectiveness of sustainable building materials in reducing CO2 emissions.

Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. I agree with this comment pointed out CO2 reduction wherever possible.

Comments 2: Unclear logic and structure of Section 2. The logic and structure of Section 2 need clarification to improve the coherence and flow of the argument.

Response 2: Agree. I/We have, accordingly revised.

Comments 3: Specify the methods used for conducting this review, including any systematic or qualitative approaches employed.

Response 3: Agree. I/We have, accordingly done.

Comments 4: Provide details on the number of articles selected for this review, the time span covered, and the keywords used in the search process.

Response 4: Agree. I/We have added the information accordingly.

Comments 5: increase the discussion of life cycle assessment methods to quantify the environmental impact of different building materials.

Response 5: Agree. I/We have, accordingly revised.

Comments 6: Clearly identify the role of policies and regulations in promoting sustainable building practices, and provide examples from specific countries or regions.

Response 6: Agree. I/We have, accordingly identified.

Comments 7: Explore how socio-economic factors can be integrated with environmental objectives to ensure that sustainable construction simultaneously promotes community well-being and economic growth.

Response 7: Agree. I/We have, accordingly identified

Comments 8: While the article mentions the improvement of indoor air quality from low-VOC materials, it lacks a detailed comparison of the health effects of different VOC limits.

Response 8:

The article is about the construction materials and does not related to medical diagonstics

Comments 9: Include more guidelines on how to consider sustainability at the design stage of a building project.

Response 9: Agree. I/We have modified accordingly.

Comments 10: Discuss the differences and adaptability of selecting sustainable materials under different climatic conditions and regions.

Response 10: the article is about United Arab Emirates where there is only one weather throughout the year.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Review Report

Summary

The manuscript titled "Sustainable Building Construction Materials in the United Arab Emirates: A Review" by Khalid Mehmood Sadar Din and Md Sayuti Ishak provides an extensive examination of sustainable construction materials in the UAE. The paper emphasizes the importance of sustainable practices in the construction industry, focusing on the environmental, economic, and social benefits of using locally sourced, recyclable, and renewable materials. The authors explore the UAE's unique context and discuss various sustainable materials, their attributes, and their implementation within the region.

Major Issues

Methodology

Lack of Clear Methodological Framework: The paper does not provide a detailed methodological framework outlining the criteria for selecting the literature reviewed. Clear inclusion and exclusion criteria for the studies reviewed should be specified to ensure the reliability and validity of the findings.
Data Sources and Analysis: While the authors mention using academic journals, textbooks, and other sources, the process of data extraction and analysis is not thoroughly explained. A more detailed description of how data was gathered and analyzed would strengthen the credibility of the review.

Integration of Sustainable Practices

Practical Implementation: The paper provides a theoretical overview of sustainable materials but lacks specific examples or case studies from the UAE. Including detailed case studies demonstrating the practical implementation of these materials would enhance the paper’s applicability and relevance to real-world scenarios.
Challenges and Barriers: The discussion on barriers to adopting sustainable practices is brief. A more comprehensive analysis of the challenges, including economic, regulatory, and technical barriers, would provide a deeper understanding of the obstacles faced by the construction industry in the UAE.

Environmental Impact Assessment

Quantitative Data: The paper discusses the environmental benefits of sustainable materials but lacks quantitative data to support these claims. Including metrics or case studies with concrete data on the environmental impact (e.g., reduction in CO2 emissions, energy savings) would provide more substantial evidence of the benefits.
Lifecycle Analysis: The review mentions lifecycle considerations but does not provide a detailed lifecycle analysis of the sustainable materials discussed. A more in-depth lifecycle assessment, including production, use, and disposal stages, would offer a holistic view of the materials' sustainability.

Minor Issues

Clarity and Readability

Figures and Tables: Some tables and figures are difficult to read and interpret. For example, Table 1 on SRI values could be more clearly presented with consistent formatting and additional explanation of terms and values.
Terminology: The use of technical terms such as "Triple Bottom Line" and "Solar Reflective Index" could be accompanied by brief explanations or definitions to ensure all readers, regardless of their background, can understand the content.

Organization and Structure

Flow of Sections: The flow between sections, especially from the introduction to the detailed discussion on materials, could be smoother. Adding transitional paragraphs or sentences that guide the reader through the paper's structure would improve readability.
Redundancy: There are some instances of repetitive information, particularly in the introduction and discussion sections. Streamlining the text to eliminate redundancy and maintain focus on key points would enhance the paper’s coherence.

Additional References

Updated Literature: While the paper cites relevant sources, incorporating more recent studies and data would ensure that the review reflects the latest advancements and trends in sustainable construction materials.
Diverse Perspectives: Including references from a wider range of geographical regions and contexts could provide a more comprehensive view of sustainable construction practices globally and how they can be adapted to the UAE context.

Suggestions for Improvement

Enhance Methodological Rigor: Provide a clear and detailed methodological framework, including criteria for literature selection and data analysis processes.
Incorporate Case Studies: Add specific examples or case studies from the UAE to illustrate the practical application and benefits of sustainable construction materials.
Expand on Challenges: Offer a more detailed analysis of the barriers to adopting sustainable practices and suggest potential solutions.
Include Quantitative Data: Support claims with quantitative data and conduct a detailed lifecycle analysis of the materials discussed.
Improve Clarity: Ensure all figures and tables are clear and easy to interpret, and provide definitions for technical terms.
Streamline Content: Remove redundant information and ensure smooth transitions between sections.
Update References: Include recent studies and diverse perspectives to provide a well-rounded view of the topic.

By addressing these issues and incorporating the suggested improvements, the manuscript would be significantly strengthened, providing a more comprehensive and robust review of sustainable building construction materials in the UAE.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Ensure all figures and tables are clear and easy to interpret, and provide definitions for technical terms.

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. The article has been revised and adjusted.

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

– Section 1.1 “Construction Industry” has a very general title that can be applied to the entire review study as a whole. It is recommended to either combine it with section 1.2 “Sustainability and Construction Industry”, or replace the title with a more specific meaning of this section. For example, like the following: The current state of the global construction industry;

– Section 1.3 “Sustainable Construction Materials”. To do this, the section needs to formulate its main idea in the form of a short conclusion. This will justify the need for this section in the manuscript;

– Line 172. The diagram should be numbered as Figure 1, a title should be added and a mention should be made in the text of the manuscript;

– Line 246. The diagram should be numbered as Figure 2, a title should be added, and a reference should be made in the text of the manuscript. Also, the diagram shows only 2 sectors out of 9. The meanings of the remaining 7 sectors should be explained;

– Sections 2.1 and 2.2 are recommended to be combined because they reflect the same idea;

– Section 2.4.8 “Water-Efficient Fittings” should be removed from Section 2.4 “Sustainable Construction Materials’ Attributes” because it does not apply to construction materials;

– Lines 262–265. Add links to literary sources confirming the information provided. Below are the following links to research on this topic that you can use:

Toward Green Concrete for a Better Sustainable Environment. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2014.12.190

Green concrete materials selection for achieving circular economy in residential buildings using system dynamics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clema.2024.100221

Supplementary Mineral Additive on Physical and Mechanical Performance of Granulated Blast Furnace Slag-Based Alkali-Activated Binders. https://doi.org/10.3390/recycling8010022

The Effect of Different Modifying Methods on Physical, Mechanical and Thermal Performance of Cellular Geopolymers as Thermal Insulation Materials for Building Structures https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12020241

– Lines 378–379. Add links to literary sources confirming the information provided.

– Line 488. The above diagram should be numbered as Figure 3, a title should be added, and a reference should be made in the text of the manuscript.

Author Response

Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. The manuscript has been revised and updated.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

All the comment have been addressed.

Author Response

For research article: Sustainable Building Construction Materials in the United Arab Emirates: A Review

Response to Reviewer 1 Comments
Summary
Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Please find the detailed responses below and the corresponding revisions/corrections highlighted/in track changes in the re-submitted files.
Comments 1: The abstract should be revised. There are too much contents on the research background. The authors should emphasize the important review work, academic conclusion, and the academic contribution.
Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. I/We agree with this comment. Therefore, I/we have updated the abstract from row 18 to 24 as highlighted in the manuscript.
Comments 2: In the section of Introduction, the structures should be reconstructed. The development of sustainability for the construction materials in UAE should be introduced. The main kinds for sustainable building construction materials involved in this review should presented. How about the current problem for sustainable construction materials?
Response 2: Agree. I/We have, accordingly, added section 1.2 and 1.3 from row 71 to 98 particular focused in the development of sustainable construction materials in the UAE.