Next Article in Journal
Adaptive Active Disturbance Rejection Control for Vehicle Steer-by-Wire under Communication Time Delays
Previous Article in Journal
Redispatch Model for Real-Time Operation with High Solar-Wind Penetration and Its Adaptation to the Ancillary Services Market
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

How Can the Circular Economy Contribute to Resolving Social Housing Challenges?

by
Fernanda Paes de Barros Gomide
1,*,
Luís Bragança
2,* and
Eloy Fassi Casagrande Junior
1
1
PPGTE, Postgraduate Program in Technology and Society, Federal University of Technology-Paraná (UTFPR), Curitiba 80230-901, Brazil
2
Department of Civil Engineering, ISISE, ARISE, University of Minho, 4800-058 Guimarães, Portugal
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Appl. Syst. Innov. 2024, 7(2), 21; https://doi.org/10.3390/asi7020021
Submission received: 26 December 2023 / Revised: 28 January 2024 / Accepted: 27 February 2024 / Published: 7 March 2024

Abstract

:
The construction sector stands as the predominant consumer of cement, steel, and plastic and is accountable for a substantial 55% of industrial carbon emissions. Greenhouse gases and other forms of pollution linked to the housing sector significantly contribute to the adverse environmental impact of the construction industry. This study underscores the need to incorporate pertinent issues into the Circular Economy (CE) agenda for a lasting and effective mitigation strategy. Through a Systematic Literature Review (SLR), this article explores answers to the research question: “How can the Circular Economy contribute to resolving social housing challenges?” The findings from this comprehensive review highlight that refurbishing the social housing (SH) built environment and formulating public policies targeted at the SH sector emerge as pivotal themes for effective solutions. The principles of the Circular Economy present a sustainable model that can play a crucial role in addressing the social housing challenge. In conclusion, this SLR demonstrates that Circular Economy principles offer a viable approach to tackling the social housing crisis. By embracing these principles, a sustainable model can be established to address the challenges posed by social housing, thereby contributing to the broader goal of environmental conservation in the construction sector.

1. Introduction

The construction sector, responsible for consuming the largest share of cement, aluminium, steel, and plastic and contributing to 55% of industrial carbon emissions [1], faces environmental challenges exacerbated by pollution from the housing sector. Due to the social housing challenge, it is imperative to address and mitigate its impact on the environment.
Research indicates that approximately 75% of the European Union’s building stock is energy-inefficient, necessitating renovation to enhance energy efficiency, reduce carbon emissions, and lower energy consumption, especially in social housing [2]. P. Nejat et al. (2017) [3] emphasise the global perspective, highlighting the rise in residential energy consumption and CO2 emissions, particularly in developing countries experiencing population growth and urbanisation, with house production incurring high costs and environmental impacts.
The absence of a universally accepted definition of social housing across the European Union [4] and other regions has led to diverse country-specific definitions, influencing the extent of government involvement. Most EU nations predominantly limit social housing to households with the lowest income [4].
This study, drawing on [4,5], defines social housing as affordable housing for low-income households or people with difficulties in finding housing, owned and managed by the government or non-profits, for rent or accession to ownership, based on defined governing rules. Fundamentally, is an essential tool for addressing housing inequality and ensuring everyone has a place to call home. A social housing (SH) project has the function of using urban space to promote socio-environmental sustainability. However, challenges such as social inclusion, access to healthy housing conditions, economic improvement, and optimal natural resource utilisation must be addressed for effective and permanent social housing.
The global issue of informal settlements, housing approximately 1 billion people [6], adds urgency to the need for sustainable housing solutions. The construction of a 40 m2 social housing unit using traditional methods in Brazil emits around 9 tons of CO2 [7], emphasising the pressing need for efficient social housing projects to promote socio-environmental sustainability.
Renewing ageing social housing stock in European countries and China is crucial due to outdated infrastructure issues [8]. Retrofitting existing buildings, a demonstrated method for significantly reducing energy consumption [8], emphasises the efficient utilisation of embedded resources, reducing the demand for new materials and minimising waste.
Introducing the Circular Economy (CE) proposal, which aims to minimise waste and maximise resource use, is crucial. Kirchherr et al. (2017) [9] worked above this concept, and in this study, the authors would like to follow their concept of Circular Economy: “an economic system that replaces the ‘end-of-life’ concept with reducing, alternatively reusing, recycling and recovering materials in production/distribution and consumption processes”.
When describing the Circular Economy in a built environment, the focus should be on how this concept applies to constructing, operating, and maintaining buildings and infrastructure. In a circular built environment, the focus is on designing for durability, adaptability, and disassembly, ensuring that materials and components can be easily reused, recycled, or repurposed at the end of their life cycle [10].
The Circular Economy model can be related to the provision of social housing in several ways. When the CE is applied to the provision of social housing, it can be incorporated into the following actions: (i) Retrofit and Sustainable Upgrades; (ii) Balancing Needs; (iii) Policy integration; (iv) Environmental Justice and Equity; and (v) Economic and Social Benefits [11,12].
Marchesi et al. (2020) [13] suggest that some social housing policies around the world incorporate CE principles, although the extent of implementation varies. Certain countries, like the Netherlands and Denmark, actively incorporate CE principles into social housing policies, promoting circularity, recycled materials, and sustainable design [14]. In China, sustainability concerns have led to research and incentives for environmentally friendly social housing, aligning with the government’s sustainable development objectives [15,16].
To ensure the long-term sustainability of social housing projects, prioritising environmentally responsible construction and renovation practices is paramount. This involves cultivating community bonds, preventing disadvantaged neighbourhoods, and offering high-quality, comfortable, affordable, and easily maintainable housing amenities [8].
Numerous studies have examined the potential of implementing a circular economic model to tackle challenges in the social housing sector. In particular, [14] emphasises the importance of combining technical and social innovations, with the latter highlighting the role of social housing communities in promoting sustainable practices. Regarding [17], a circular approach to urban resource management will significantly reduce the consumption of finite resources globally. For example, Zairul et al. (2018) [18] suggests adopting a Circular Economy in a flexible housing project to curb price consumption and extend the lifespan of housing units. Additionally, Mazur (2021) [19] supports implementing a Circular Economy in housing construction, primarily using recycled materials.
These studies underscore the potential of a circular economic model in addressing social housing challenges, emphasising resource efficiency, sustainable practices, and affordable housing solutions. Recognising social housing solutions and incorporating them into the CE agenda is crucial for effective implementation.
Despite the technological focus of CE implementation, attention to social practices and changes in user behaviour remain limited [11]. Çetin et al. (2021) [12] emphasise the overlooked potential of social housing organisations in generating circular resource flows within the built environment.
CE principles are available and can help to face the social housing crisis. CE principles propose a sustainability model to participate in the social housing challenge. In this sense, this study can help to scrutinise the primary efforts that have been made by the academic sector towards this cause and understand how SH and CE can work together.
Based on a Systematic Review of Literature (SLR) methodology, this study intends to explore “How can the Circular Economy contribute to resolving social housing challenges?”. To this end, this research aims to understand, through a Systematic Literature Review, how CE has been related to SH studies.
Guided by this objective, the questions designed to be answered in this research are:
QP1. Which themes related to the Circular Economy have been studied in social housing research?
QP2. Which Circular Economy principles have been addressed in studies on social housing?
QP3. How can the construction sector contribute to a Circular Economy model addressing social housing challenges?
QP4. What gaps remain in the relationship between social housing and the Circular Economy?
Given this context, urgent discussions are needed regarding social housing in the context of new housing production and stock renewal. This must be a priority for the sustainability of the built environment.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Literature Review Approach

The use of Systematic Literature Reviews (SLRs) is crucial in gathering evidence that meets specific eligibility criteria to address research questions. SLRs employ explicit and systematic methods to minimise bias and are considered the gold standard in research methodologies.
In addition to mapping, evaluating, and synthesising the literature to develop knowledge in a particular field, SLRs can identify gaps and foster new research agendas. These benefits enable researchers to obtain robust and reliable findings, informing policy and decision-making.
This Systematic Literature Review aims to conduct a descriptive and exploratory analysis of the literature data to examine how academic contributors and professionals in the field of social housing have interpreted and implemented the concept of the Circular Economy. Although this study may have limitations, such as reliance on search strings, databases, and exclusion criteria, the authors believe that it provides a comprehensive coverage of the literature.

2.2. Stages of Systematic Review Protocol

2.2.1. Planning

A systematic, transparent, impartial review protocol was created to achieve the research objectives. The protocol was developed with the guidance of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, Version 6.4, 2023 [20], to ensure methodological rigour. It includes a detailed description and justification for the review objectives, intended research methods, criteria for study inclusion, and methodology for data extraction, processing, and synthesis. Adopting a specific Systematic Literature Review (SLR) process enhances the legitimacy of the evidence and the authority of the results.
To ensure the successful completion of a systematic review, it is crucial to have strong data management practices, effective project management techniques, and reliable quality-assurance mechanisms [21]. For this particular study, the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, Version 6.4, 2023, was utilised as the methodological guide. Following the study’s established protocol (See Table 1), the initial step in conducting an SLR involved identifying the issues to be examined and developing a rationale for the selected topic from the authors’ perspective.
The implementation of a Circular Economy in social housing requires the development of technological solutions and the integration of social value within the housing community. Both components are essential in achieving success. Due to this challenge, exploring “How can the Circular Economy collaborate on the issue of social housing?” seems to be an essential step on a long road towards ecologically correct, socially fair, economically viable, and culturally appropriate solutions.
The period for this research was defined as 2015 to 2023. Only articles written in English were considered for this review. Qualitative and quantitative studies developed within the scope of SH and CE were considered for this review.
By the protocol designed for this study, the focus of this review was oriented towards the following specific objectives:
  • Exploring the most-used terms in academic bases related to SH and the CE.
  • Selecting, through an SLR, documents that deal with SH and relate to CE principles.
  • Listing the study themes covered in SH studies related to the CE.
  • Listing which Circular Economy principles have been addressed in studies on social housing.
  • Listing the main proposals made in the documents.
  • Identifying potential future gaps and opportunities to fuel the process towards a CE in the SH sector.

2.2.2. Proceedings

The significance of researchers having access to high-quality, relevant, accessible, and up-to-date information while conducting systematic reviews cannot be overstated, as emphasised by [20]. To ensure the comprehensive coverage of studies, the researchers employed information sources from three academic databases: Web of Science from Clarivate Analytics, ScienceDirect, and Scopus from Elsevier.
Web of Science was preferred due to its ability to cover all indexed journals with an impact factor calculated in the Journal Citation Report (JCR). ScienceDirect provided access to international multidisciplinary studies, while Scopus had broad global and regional coverage of scientific journals, conference proceedings, and books [22]. The filter applied to the databases was “type of documents”, choosing all documents.

2.2.3. Analysis

The research structure was organised into three levels of action.
With attention to specific objective 1, at the first level, the researchers in this study struggled to understand the concept of HSPs. This action was necessary because it is a complex term that can vary depending on the culture, governments, programs, and needs of each country and location. At this level of research, the related terms that appeared most in the state-of-the-art literature related to SH were affordable house, public housing, and housing estate.
Still, at this level, the state-of-the-art Circular Economy principles pointed to the following terms: life cycle assessment/costing (LCA/LCC), circular material, and cradle-to-cradle.
The second level of research dealt with the systematic review in question. A requirement for carrying out an SLR is a concise description of document inclusion and exclusion criteria [20]. The following criteria for document inclusion were adopted: all types of documents; within the range of 2015 at the date of this research; availability in English; and complete text available with free access.
At level two of the research, we sought to fulfil specific objective 2. For each of the three databases, the search for SH (and other terms defined at level one) was combined with CE (and other terms defined at level one). Three selection lists were created from this selection, with 905 documents from Scopus, 37 from Web of Science, and 70 from ScienceDirect.
These three lists selected by the databases were exported to Microsoft Excel version 16.77.1 for data processing. In Excel, these lists were unified, and duplicate articles and those without free access to the full text were excluded, bringing the total to 939 documents.
In this phase, 157 documents were added and cited in the documents’ bibliographic references and met the pre-defined criteria for the initial research, finalising the selection of 1096 valid documents (See Figure 1).
The research was then dedicated to level three of this study, developing a Results Matrix, a technique that facilitates the organisation of results. It is a table capable of presenting the results of research in a concise and easy-to-understand way. When dealing with extensive information, the instrument allows easy understanding, visualisation, and organisation [22]. In addition to a recording instrument, the Results Matrix can be considered a form of analysis, considering that as the information is classified and selected, it is possible to identify the relationships between them [22].
In Results Matrix 1, the 1096 documents (identified by title and Doi) were listed in column 1 of the Excel document. We sought to determine whether there was significant content about the SH theme and the CE for each document. After thoroughly scrutinising the documents, 344 documents were found that compulsorily met the 2 study themes. Figure 2 illustrates part of Results Matrix 1. Only articles marked with “X” in the last column (SH + CE) were selected (see Figure 2).
With this selection, the following data were extracted from each document and noted in the following columns, corresponding to each document: study theme; Circular Economy principles related to the study topic; proposals suggested by the studies; country dedicated to study; year of the document; and the bibliographic reference. Specific objectives 3, 4, and 5 were thus met. Figure 3 illustrates part of Results Matrix 2.
The study themes are directly related to the keywords that the authors and the index indicated. They are presented in the Results.
In studies on social housing, several Circular Economy principles have been addressed. With the contribution of [23,24], in addition to the results of this SLR, Circular Economy principles related to the issue of SH were defined:
  • Develop sustainable construction practices such as industrialised building systems (IBSs) and prefabricated and precast construction; modular construction; green buildings (GBs); Industry 4.0 technologies; Internet of Things (IoT); Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Digital Twin; sound insulation; social innovations; nature-based solutions; rainwater solutions; sustainable design; environmental product declarations (EPDs); Passive House; green roof; embodied energy; embodied carbon; passport material; water reuse, alternative water supply systems, water consumption and living labs; Circular Materials (CMs); clean technology; Nearly Zero Energy Building (NZEB); refurbishment; retrofit; use adaptation; renewable energy sources, Design for Adaptability (DfA); Design for Disassembly (DfD); Life Cycle Assessment (LCA); Life Cycle Costing (LCC); Social Life Cycle Assessment (S-LCA); social innovation (SI); decision-making methods; Key Performance Indicators (KPIs); and seismic systems, among others.
  • Promote more-efficient thermal comfort systems, such as efficient lighting; Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning systems (HVAC); Photovoltaic/Thermal systems (PV/T); building-integrated photovoltaics (BIPVs); low-energy-consumption heating and cooling systems; Life Cycle Energy (LCE); and energy assessment methods, among others.
  • Minimise waste such as reuse; recycle; redesign; remanufacturing; recover; composting; and construction and demolition waste (CDW).
  • Protect and preserve the natural environment, such as protecting green areas; recovering degraded ecosystems; promoting biodiversity; Urban Agriculture (AU); permeabilisation; open spaces; green areas, and indigenous housing, among others.
  • Advance sustainable public policies such as land-use and occupancy policies; social housing policies; social value creation (SVC); Public–Private Partnership (PPP); citizen engagement; participatory design; incremental architecture; accessibility; triple helix; self-construction programs; health conditions; energy poverty; user behaviour; user satisfaction; property laws; public services; government incentives; rental social housing; heritage; multi-stakeholders; technical regulation; and neighbourhood concerns, among others.

3. Results

3.1. Study Themes

Working with filters in Result Matrix 2, a list of the most-covered themes can be seen in Figure 4.
In Figure 5, it is possible to visualise the distribution of the publications by country.
In this SLR, 57 countries produced material with different themes. Figure 6 shows the eleven (England and India tied in the tenth position) countries that contributed most to the total number of publications.
European countries represent 53% of all studies in this SLR. Italy, Portugal, and Spain produced 47% of this European amount.
Many themes in the 344 documents were organised based on their corresponding keywords. A colour-scale table allows for quickly identifying relevant themes by country and production. Themes with similar meanings are grouped in Figure 7 to enhance sample diversity.
The country in Asia that invests the most in research into the themes of this SLR is China, with 38% of collaborations in this region. China has discussed housing policies and energy efficiency on the issue of SH with attention not only to technical aspects such as prefabrication and renovations but also to user involvement in this challenge (See Figure 8).
In Latin America and the Caribbean, with most contributions from Brazil and Mexico, the preferred themes are in Figure 9.

3.2. Circular Economy Principles

In response to QP2, the Circular Economy principles that have benefited most from this research, listed in order from most related to the themes to the least related, in percentage, are:
1—Sustainable construction practices: 67%.
5—Advancing sustainable public policies: 48%.
2—More efficient thermal comfort systems: 42%.
3—Minimising waste: 3%.
4—Protecting and preserving the natural environment: 3%.

3.3. Proposals

In response to QP3, below is a summary (see Table 2) of the main ideas proposed in the documents that promise to contribute to rectifying the SH issue and moving towards a CE. It is possible to identify the articles not sourced in Table 2 in Appendix A for the 334 selected articles.

4. Discussion

The comprehensive results showed that the recovery of the social housing built environment and the SH public policies are the themes of most significant interest in acting towards solutions. These actions are a positive sign since maintaining what is already built is a principle of the CE. Added to this optimistic horizon is a consensus that the issue of SH worldwide can only be settled at the level of public policies.
European countries, especially Italy, Spain, and the Netherlands, are engaged in renewing the valuable life of SH buildings. Recognising that renovating structures, coatings, and building systems is a more sustainable choice than building new units is a big step Europe is taking in the construction sector. The incentives of the European Climate Law, the European Green Deal, and national policies have stimulated the diagnosis of and proposals to deal with the housing issue based on CE principles [9]. The themes that appear most in European research concern the renewal of the social housing stock, with improved energy efficiency reflected in thermal performance measures with new hot water systems, interior heating and cooling, and the insulation of buildings.
Unlike EU incentives, in Brazil, most housing policies are invested in constructing new units rather than requalifying older units [150]. In developing countries, the challenge of maintaining the existing social housing stock is added to the volume of housing to be built. Housing deficits reach thousands in countries such as Brazil, Mexico, China, and India, among others. The construction of new SH units is necessary, and the volume varies from country to country. According to [151], Brazil had a housing deficit of approximately 5876 million homes in 2019, and around 25 million houses in Brazil need to be considered adequate. In turn, Mexico has delayed about 20 million units. The studies, prioritised by Latin America and the Caribbean, reflect the connection between energy efficiency and thermal comfort performance; decision-making simulation methods; and user-centred solutions. User-centred solutions are essential because by understanding users’ needs and preferences, organisations can create solutions that provide a competitive advantage in the marketplace [152]. Based on the findings, it is evident that certain nations must endeavour to augment their focus on exploring methodologies that encourage productiveness at a relatively low cost while maintaining a minimum level of quality and environmental impact. Notably, the studies did not delve into academic deliberations regarding this milieu.
Relevant data on the rates of vacant homes in many cities, such as Chicago in the United States and São Paulo in Brazil, have been incorporated into discussions on the issue of social housing. For example, Chicago has 50 vacant homes per homeless citizen [153]. In Brazil, the number of empty homes is twice as high as the country’s housing deficit [154].
China has a significant stock of SH, but it was built en masse with serious quality problems, confirmed by their studies. The floating population of migrants in China was estimated to be more than 221 million inhabitants [155]. A country that has to settle all these families must think about programs for efficient social housing. Concern about environmental damage must be relevant in this process. The studies carried out by China selected in this SLR strongly focus on discussing public policies, energy efficiency, and recognising that user participation leads to products and services that are more acceptable, intuitive, and effective. Proposals for scenario decision methodologies, the use of IBS, and renewing the quality of SH stock are part of these studies (see Figure 4).
Multi-criteria methodologies for decision-making within CE principles have been studied to systematise all data and simulate cost-versus-nature scenarios. The documents indicate that CE concerns in SH are still in the diagnosis, analysis, and planning phase. The use and development of decision-making methodologies like LCC, LCA, and thermal and energy-efficiency assessments are proof of this. Considering Artificial Intelligence (AI)’s environmental impact is also essential. Advanced technologies such as the Internet of Things (IoT), Digital Twins, BIM, algorithms, data mining, and artificial neural networks (ANNs) can significantly enhance the transition to a CE.
Regarding QP4, when analysing the two Circular Economy principles that have received little contribution, the research gaps are:
  • Analysis of ecological indicator systems, sustainable regional/urban planning, and existing green building programs [156]. To this end, updates to sustainability regulations (parameters, regulations, laws, regulations, codes, public policies) in the built environment are necessary, focusing on meeting local needs, such as making sustainability indicators more flexible in areas with low-income residents.
  • An important point that must be highlighted in this discussion is the implementation of prefabricated building systems. The theme of industrialised building systems (IBSs) and prefabrication deserve more attention regarding the development and current status of prefabrication techniques, their application in the social housing building sector, and why their use still needs improvement.
  • It was also noted that the concepts of Design for Adaptability (DfA); Design for Disassembly (DfD); and material passports needed more space in research.
  • Concerning construction and demolition waste in particular (CDW), little has been investigated in terms of the use of this waste integrated into recovery solutions for SH studies and in the production of new SH units.
  • Regarding studies on the quality of the surrounding environment, shared spaces, neighbourhoods, green areas, and the recovery of degraded environments, more must be dedicated to studying them parallel to the housing itself.
  • Still, little has been studied about sanitation infrastructure, mobility, and accessibility and how they are essential for the sustainability of environments. This literature review clearly shows that the reality of concerns and priorities regarding the provision and maintenance of SH are different in different regions of the globe.

5. Conclusions

Based on the achieved results, a rich and exciting universe has opened up on the horizon. Returning to the main question problem of this research, which intended to explore “How can the Circular Economy contribute to resolving social housing challenges?”, some findings should be enhanced:
  • The five most-studied themes are public policies, decision-making methods, retrofit/refurbishment, thermal efficiency, and Life Cycle Assessment/Costing (LCA/LCC).
  • The five main Circular Economy principles addressed are sustainable construction practices, advancing sustainable public policies, more-efficient thermal comfort systems, minimising waste, and protecting and preserving the natural environment.
  • The main contribution proposals provided by these studies are users’ orientation, energy-efficiency measures, and social housing policies.
  • Regarding gaps found in this RSL, the most notorious are cultural sustainability criteria and indicators, the implementation of prefabricated building systems; Design for Adaptability (DfA) and Design for Disassembly (DfD) studies, and material passport evolution.
The focus on incorporating aspects related to user behaviour in various contexts, particularly in energy-consumption habits, the importance of engaging users and citizens to ensure that projects and maintenance are truly efficient, and user satisfaction about the renewed environment, takes the sustainability of the built environment beyond technical requirements. Figure 7 clarifies the relevance of understanding the role of user participation in the SH issue. In their studies, Çetin et al. (2021) and Marchesi & Tweed (2021) [11,12] emphasise the importance of combining technical and social innovations, with the latter highlighting the role of social housing communities in promoting sustainable practices. The urgency of revising SH management models, buildings, land use, and environmental quality, along with other forms of legislation and standardisation, could provide a new dynamic with which to tackle SH solutions based on CE principles. Furthermore, it is understood that climatic characteristics vary significantly within the European continent and other continents, leading to the need for environmental comfort parameters and energy-efficiency targets to include adaptations to energy-efficiency indicators and criteria and the cost for each reality.
A whole cultural context naturally emerges when the user is involved in the solution scenario. It makes the challenge more complex, but studies such as [157] show the relevance for everyone’s satisfaction in the project. Incorporating culture into sustainable development has proven to be a persistent obstacle [156]. So, embracing cultural sustainability criteria and indicators as a fundamental structure for social housing solutions is crucial. This strategy unlocks fresh avenues for advanced investigations. Integrating culture into sustainable development (SD) has been a continuous challenge. By assuming that the built environment is a cultural resource that reflects the past and shapes the future of society, and by providing cultural sustainability criteria and indicators as a framework to be adopted by social housing solutions, this paper opens new perspectives for further research.
This SLR research draws attention to essential points that should support public policies dealing with SH: (i) maintaining the space already built, avoiding using more natural resources; (ii) the user’s role in decision-making processes; (iii) and the political will to resolve the challenge. In this context, public authorities must act creatively, effectively, and transparently in processes that enable citizen participation in SH programs within the principles of the CE.
However, this study must be continued and expanded into many other related areas, which can deepen the level of understanding of the state of the housing issue in the world, including in specific regions and countries. Furthermore, focusing on particular realities will be a priority so that contexts are incorporated into proposals for the evolution of social housing, moving towards the CE model.
This SLR illustrates that the CE principles are available to face the social housing challenge, and with their help, this can lead to a sustainable model with which to solve the social housing crisis.

Author Contributions

Conceptualisation, F.P.d.B.G.; methodology, F.P.d.B.G.; validation, F.P.d.B.G., L.B. and E.F.C.J.; formal analysis, F.P.d.B.G., L.B. and E.F.C.J.; investigation, F.P.d.B.G.; data curation, F.P.d.B.G.; writing—original draft preparation, F.P.d.B.G.; writing—review and editing, F.P.d.B.G.; visualisation, F.P.d.B.G.; supervision, L.B. and E.F.C.J. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work has the financial support of PDSE—Programa de Doutorado Sanduíche no Exterior—88881.846454/2023-01 (Personnel Improvement Coordination of High Level—CAPES), under the Federal University of Technology—Parana (UTFPR), and under the Postgraduate Program in Technology and Society (PPGTE). This work was partly financed by FCT/MCTES through national funds (PIDDAC) under the R&D Unit Institute for Sustainability and Innovation in Structural Engineering (ISISE), under reference UIDB/04029/2020, under the Associate Laboratory Advanced Production and Intelligent Systems ARISE under reference LA/P/0112/2020, under the CYTED Network Circular Economy as a Strategy for a More Sustainable Construction Industry (ECoEICo) under reference 322RT0127, and under the COST Action Implementation of Circular Economy in the Built Environment (CircularB) under reference CA21103.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Appendix A

  • Abdul Rahim, A., & Qureshi, S. L. (2018). A REVIEW OF IBS IMPLEMENTATION IN MALAYSIA AND SINGAPORE. PLANNING MALAYSIA, 16. https://doi.org/10.21837/pm.v16i6.486
  • Adabre, M. A., & Chan, A. P. C. (2019). Critical success factors (CSFs) for sustainable affordable housing. Building and Environment, 156, 203–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.04.030
  • Adabre, M. A., Chan, A. P. C., Darko, A., Osei-Kyei, R., Abidoye, R., & Adjei-Kumi, T. (2020). Critical barriers to sustainability attainment in affordable housing: International construction professionals’ perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production, 253, 119995. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.119995
  • Adetooto, J., Windapo, A., Pomponi, F., Companie, F., Alade, K., & Mtya, A. (2022). Strategies to promote the acceptance of sandbag building technology for sustainable and affordable housing delivery: The South African case. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEDT-06-2022-0290
  • Adly, B., & El-Khouly, T. (2022). Combining retrofitting techniques, renewable energy resources and regulations for residential buildings to achieve energy efficiency in gated communities. Ain Shams Engineering Journal, 13(6), 101772. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2022.101772
  • Almeida, M., Barbosa, R., & Malheiro, R. (2020). Effect of Embodied Energy on Cost-Effectiveness of a Prefabricated Modular Solution on Renovation Scenarios in Social Housing in Porto, Portugal. Sustainability, 12(4), 1631. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12041631
  • Alotaibi, B. S., Khan, S. A., Abuhussain, M. A., Al-Tamimi, N., Elnaklah, R., & Kamal, M. A. (2022). Life Cycle Assessment of Embodied Carbon and Strategies for Decarbonization of a High-Rise Residential Building. Buildings, 12(8), 1203. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12081203
  • Anderson, N., Wedawatta, G., Rathnayake, I., Domingo, N., & Azizi, Z. (2022). Embodied Energy Consumption in the Residential Sector: A Case Study of Affordable Housing. Sustainability, 14(9), 5051. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14095051
  • Arbulu, M., Oregi, X., Etxepare, L., & Hernández-Minguillón, R. J. (2022). Barriers and challenges of the assessment framework of the Commission Recommendation (EU) 2019/786 on building renovation by European RTD projects. Energy and Buildings, 269, 112267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2022.112267
  • Aulia, D. N. (2016). A Framework for Exploring Livable Community in Residential Environment. Case Study: Public Housing in Medan, Indonesia. Procedia–Social and Behavioral Sciences, 234, 336–343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.10.250
  • Avilova, I. P., Krygina, A. M., Krygina, N. M., Koshlich, Y. A., & Oberemok, M. I. (2020). Sustainable Development of Civil and Residential Real Estate Based on the Construction Waste Recycling. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 890(1), 012187. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/890/1/012187
  • Bahtiar, E. T., Denih, A., & Putra, G. R. (2023). Multi-culm bamboo composites as sustainable materials for green constructions: Section properties and column behavior. Results in Engineering, 17, 100911. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rineng.2023.100911
  • Baker, E., Moore, T., Daniel, L., Caines, R., Padilla, H., & Lester, L. (2023). Sustainable social housing retrofit? Circular economy and tenant trade-offs. AHURI Final Report, 397. https://doi.org/10.18408/ahuri3128301
  • Bansal, D., Minocha, V. K., Kaur, A., Dakwale, V. A., & Ralegaonkar, R. V. (2021). Reduction of Embodied Energy and Construction Cost of Affordable Houses through Efficient Architectural Design: A Case Study in Indian Scenario. Advances in Civil Engineering, 2021, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/5693101
  • Barbosa, R., Almeida, M., Briones-Llorente, R., & Mateus, R. (2022). Environmental Performance of a Cost-Effective Energy Renovation at the Neighbourhood Scale—The Case for Social Housing in Braga, Portugal. Sustainability, 14(4), 1947. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14041947
  • Barrientos-Gonzalez, R., Vega-Azamar, R., Cruz, J., Rosas-Correa, G., & García, N. (2019). Environmental Performance of a Social Housing Type Characteristic of South-Eastern Mexico. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 603, 052051. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/603/5/052051
  • Bautista, B. E., Garciano, L. E. O., & Lopez, L. F. (2021). Comparative Analysis of Shear Strength Parallel to Fiber of Different Local Bamboo Species in the Philippines. Sustainability, 13(15), 8164. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13158164
  • Bénard, F., & Malet-Damour, B. (2022). Assessing potential of plastic waste management policies for territories sustainability: Case study of Reunion Island. World Development Sustainability, 1, 100030. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wds.2022.100030
  • Bianchi, P. F., Yepes, V., Vitorio, P. C., & Kripka, M. (2021). Study of Alternatives for the Design of Sustainable Low-Income Housing in Brazil. Sustainability, 13(9), 4757. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13094757
  • Bican, N. B. (2020). A New Methodology For Analysis Of Spatial Interventions Towards Sustainability In Social Housing Regeneration—The Case Of Gyldenrisparken In Copenhagen. METU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture. https://doi.org/10.4305/METU.JFA.2020.2.2
  • Blázquez, T., Dalla Mora, T., Ferrari, S., Romagnoni, P., Teso, L., & Zagarella, F. (2022). Renovating Building Groups in the Mediterranean Climate: Cost-Effectiveness of Renewable-Based Heating Alternatives in the Italian Context. Sustainability, 14(19), 12303. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141912303
  • Bogdanović Protić, I., Mitković, P., & Vasilevska, L. (2020). Toward Regeneration of Public Open Spaces within Large Housing Estates–A Case Study of Niš, Serbia. Sustainability, 12(24), 10256. https://doi.org/10.3390/su122410256
  • Bonenberg, W., Rybicki, S. M., Schneider-Skalska, G., & Stochel-Cyunel, J. (2022). Sustainable Water Management in a Krakow Housing Complex from the Nineteen-Seventies in Comparison with a Model Bio-Morpheme Unit. Sustainability, 14(9), 5499. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14095499
  • Braì, E., Mangialardi, G., & Scarpelli, D. (2022). Circular living. A resilient housing proposal. TeMA—Journal of Land Use, Mobility and Environment, 447–469 Pages. https://doi.org/10.6093/1970-9870/9068
  • Brás, A., Chippagiri, R., Torres de Sande, V., Rley, M., & Ralegaonkar, R. (2020). Sustainable and affordable prefab housing systems with minimal whole life energy use. Energy and Buildings, 220, 110030. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2020.110030
  • Bredenoord, J., & Kulshreshtha, Y. (2023). Compressed Stabilized Earthen Blocks and Their Use in Low-Cost Social Housing. Sustainability, 15(6), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15065295
  • Bright, S., Weatherall, D., & Willis, R. (2019). Exploring the complexities of energy retrofit in mixed tenure social housing: A case study from England, UK. Energy Efficiency, 12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-018-9676-y
  • Brozovsky, J., Gustavsen, A., & Gaitani, N. (2021). Zero emission neighbourhoods and positive energy districts—A state-of-the-art review. Sustainable Cities and Society, 72, 103013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.103013
  • Bunster, V., & Noguchi, M. (2015). Profiling Space Heating Behavior in Chilean Social Housing: Towards Personalization of Energy Efficiency Measures. Sustainability, 7(6), 7973–7996. https://doi.org/10.3390/su7067973
  • Burgers, L., & Pijl, K. (2022). Collective Ownership and Representation in a Sustainable City: Investigating the Potential of the Community Land Trust and the Zoöp Model. Erasmus Law Review, 15(3), 212–228. https://doi.org/10.5553/ELR.000230
  • Carvalho, M. T. M., Caldas, L. R., & Sposto, R. M. (2020). Avaliação da sustentabilidade de habitações de interesse social a partir da especificação de materiais e elementos de edificação. Revista de Gestão Ambiental e Sustentabilidade, 9(1), e17155. https://doi.org/10.5585/geas.v9i1.17155
  • Castellano-Román, M., Garcia-Martinez, A., & Pérez López, M. L. (2022). Social Housing Life Cycle Management: Workflow for the Enhancement of Digital Management Based on Building Information Modelling (BIM). Sustainability, 14(12), 7488. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127488
  • Cataldo, M., Araya-Letelier, G., & Pereira, C. (2016a). Obstacles and motivations for earthbag social housing in Chile: Energy, environment, economic and codes implications. Revista de La Construcción, 15, 17–26. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-915X2016000300002
  • Chan, A. P. C., & Adabre, M. A. (2019). Bridging the gap between sustainable housing and affordable housing: The required critical success criteria (CSC). Building and Environment, 151, 112–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.01.029
  • Chaves, F. J., Tzortzopoulos, P., Formoso, C. T., & Biotto, C. N. (2017). Building information modelling to cut disruption in housing retrofit. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers—Engineering Sustainability, 170(6), 322–333. https://doi.org/10.1680/jensu.16.00063
  • Chen, T., An, Y., & Heng, C. K. (2022). A Review of Building-Integrated Photovoltaics in Singapore: Status, Barriers, and Prospects. Sustainability, 14(16), 10160. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141610160
  • Chiara Mazzarella, P., & Remoy, H. (2021). Bijlmermeer and Scampia: The potential of suburbs as centralities in sustainable and circular cities. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 855(1), 012022. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/855/1/012022
  • Chippagiri, R., Bras, A., Sharma, D., & Ralegaonkar, R. V. (2022). Technological and Sustainable Perception on the Advancements of Prefabrication in Construction Industry. Energies, 15(20), 7548. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15207548
  • Cinquepalmi, F., Paris, S., Pennacchia, E., & Tiburcio, V. A. (2023). Efficiency and Sustainability: The Role of Digitization in Re-Inhabiting the Existing Building Stock. Energies, 16(9), 3613. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16093613
  • Colclough, S., Kinnane, O., Hewitt, N., & Griffiths, P. (2018). Investigation of nZEB social housing built to the Passive House standard. Energy and Buildings, 179, 344–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2018.06.069
  • Condotta, M., Scanagatta, C., & Zatta, E. (2023). Sustainable strategies to preserve tangible and intangible values in social housing rehabilitation: An Italian case study. VITRUVIO—International Journal of Architectural Technology and Sustainability, 8(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.4995/vitruvio-ijats.2023.19479
  • Copiello, S. (2015). Achieving affordable housing through energy efficiency strategy. Energy Policy, 85, 288–298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2015.06.017
  • Copiello, S. & IUAV University of Venice, Department of Architecture, Dorsoduro 2206, 30123 Venice, Italy. (2021). Economic viability of building energy efficiency measures: A review on the discount rate. AIMS Energy, 9(2), 257–285. https://doi.org/10.3934/energy.2021014
  • Coscia, C., Mukerjee, S., Palmieri, B. L., & Quintanal Rivacoba, C. (2020). Enhancing the Sustainability of Social Housing Policies through the Social Impact Approach: Innovative Perspectives form a “Paris Affordable Housing Challenge” Project in France. Sustainability, 12(23), 9903. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12239903
  • Dave, M., Watson, B., & Prasad, D. (2017). Performance and Perception in Prefab Housing: An Exploratory Industry Survey on Sustainability and Affordability. Procedia Engineering, 180, 676–686. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.04.227
  • De Almeida Barbosa Franco, J., Domingues, A. M., De Almeida Africano, N., Deus, R. M., & Battistelle, R. A. G. (2022). Sustainability in the Civil Construction Sector Supported by Industry 4.0 Technologies: Challenges and Opportunities. Infrastructures, 7(3), 43. https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures7030043
  • De Barba, D., Gomes, J., & Lacerda, J. (2015). Sustainability Assessment in Conventional and Industrialized Systems Built in Brazil. Procedia CIRP, 29, 144–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2015.02.190
  • De Feijter, F. J. (2023). Trust in circular design: Active stakeholder participation in Chinese and Dutch housing retrofit projects. Building Research & Information, 51(1), 105–118. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2022.2121905
  • De Medici, S., Marchiano, G., & Pinto, M. R. (2023). A participatory project for the Librino Social Housing Community. VITRUVIO—International Journal of Architectural Technology and Sustainability, 8(1), 100–113. https://doi.org/10.4995/vitruvio-ijats.2023.19495
  • DellaValle, N., Bisello, A., & Balest, J. (2018). In search of behavioural and social levers for effective social housing retrofit programs. Energy and Buildings, 172, 517–524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2018.05.002
  • Deng, M., Menassa, C. C., & Kamat, V. R. (2021). From BIM to digital twins: A systematic review of the evolution of intelligent building representations in the AEC-FM industry. Journal of Information Technology in Construction, 26, 58–83. https://doi.org/10.36680/j.itcon.2021.005
  • Di Domênico, M., Silva, T. L. D., & Ribeiro, L. A. (2021). Avaliação de ciclo de vida dos sistemas construtivos de uma unidade habitacional de interesse social. Revista de Gestão Ambiental e Sustentabilidade, 10(1), e20442. https://doi.org/10.5585/geas.v10i1.20442
  • Diaz Lozano Patino, E., & Siegel, J. A. (2018). Indoor environmental quality in social housing: A literature review. Building and Environment, 131, 231–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.01.013
  • Díaz-López, C., Navarro-Galera, A., Zamorano, M., & Buendía-Carrillo, D. (2021). Identifying Public Policies to Promote Sustainable Building: A Proposal for Governmental Drivers Based on Stakeholder Perceptions. Sustainability, 13(14), 7701. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13147701
  • Domènech-Rodríguez, M., Cornadó, C., Vima-Grau, S., Piasek, G., Varela-Conde, A., & Ravetllat Mira, P. J. (2023). Co-Design and Co-Manufacturing: A Multidisciplinary Approach through Small-Scale Architectural Experiences in Barcelona. Buildings, 13(5), 1159. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13051159
  • Domínguez, I., Ward, S., Mendoza, J., Rincón, C., & Oviedo-Ocaña, E. (2017). End-User Cost-Benefit Prioritization for Selecting Rainwater Harvesting and Greywater Reuse in Social Housing. Water, 9(7), 516. https://doi.org/10.3390/w9070516
  • Domínguez-Torres, C.-A., Domínguez-Torres, H., & Domínguez-Delgado, A. (2021). Optimization of a Combination of Thermal Insulation and Cool Roof for the Refurbishment of Social Housing in Southern Spain. Sustainability, 13(19), 10738. https://doi.org/10.3390/su131910738
  • Dühr, S., Berry, S., & Moore, T. (2023). Sustainable housing at a neighbourhood scale. AHURI Final Report, 396. https://doi.org/10.18408/ahuri3228101
  • Eikelenboom, M., & Long, T. B. (2023). Breaking the Cycle of Marginalization: How to Involve Local Communities in Multi-stakeholder Initiatives? Journal of Business Ethics, 186(1), 31–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-022-05252-5
  • Elmenghawi, F., & Cazacova, L. (2023). Social Housing Assessment for Sustainable Model Development: Case Study Ras Al Khaimah, UAE. Journal of Law and Sustainable Development, 11, e675. https://doi.org/10.55908/sdgs.v11i5.675
  • Elsharkawy, H., & Rutherford, P. (2015). Retrofitting social housing in the UK: Home energy use and performance in a pre-Community Energy Saving Programme (CESP). Energy and Buildings, 88, 25–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2014.11.045
  • Elsharkawy, H., & Rutherford, P. (2018). Energy-efficient retrofit of social housing in the UK: Lessons learned from a Community Energy Saving Programme (CESP) in Nottingham. Energy and Buildings, 172, 295–306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2018.04.067
  • Errante, L., & De Capua, A. (2021). Design for Disassembly and the rehabilitation of public housing stock. A case study. TECHNE—Journal of Technology for Architecture and Environment, 181–191. https://doi.org/10.36253/techne-10596
  • Escandón, R., Suárez, R., & Sendra, J. J. (2017). On the assessment of the energy performance and environmental behaviour of social housing stock for the adjustment between simulated and measured data: The case of mild winters in the Mediterranean climate of southern Europe. Energy and Buildings, 152, 418–433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.07.063
  • Ezema, I., Olotuah, A. O., & Fagbenle, O. (2016). Evaluation of Energy Use in Public Housing in Lagos, Nigeria: Prospects for Renewable Energy Sources. International Journal of Renewable Energy Development(IJRED), 5. https://doi.org/10.14710/ijred.5.1.15-24
  • Famiglietti, J., Aprile, M., Spirito, G., & Motta, M. (2023). Net-Zero Climate Emissions Districts: Potentials and Constraints for Social Housing in Milan. Energies, 16(3), 1504. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16031504
  • Fantozzi, F., Gargari, C., Rovai, M., & Salvadori, G. (2019). Energy Upgrading of Residential Building Stock: Use of Life Cycle Cost Analysis to Assess Interventions on Social Housing in Italy. Sustainability, 11(5), 1452. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11051452
  • Feng, K., Lu, W., Wang, Y., & Man, Q. (2022). Energy-Efficient Retrofitting under Incomplete Information: A Data-Driven Approach and Empirical Study of Sweden. Buildings, 12(8), 1244. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12081244
  • Ferrari, S., Blázquez, T., & Dall’O’, G. (2021). Energy performance indexes based on monitored data of social housing buildings in Northern Italy. Applied Energy, 298, 117264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2021.117264
  • Ferreira, Z. (2016). Adaptive Reuse. The Modern Movement towards the Future. TOSTOES, Ana; FERREIRA, Zara (Ed.), Adaptive Reuse. The Modern Movement towards the Future, Lisbon/Porto, Docomomo International/Casa Da Arquitectura. https://www.academia.edu/42029843/Adaptive_Reuse_The_Modern_Movement_towards_the_Future
  • Filho, M. V. A. P. M., Da Costa, B. B. F., Najjar, M., Figueiredo, K. V., De Mendonça, M. B., & Haddad, A. N. (2022). Sustainability Assessment of a Low-Income Building: A BIM-LCSA-FAHP-Based Analysis. Buildings, 12(2), 181. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12020181
  • Flores-Abascal, I., Hernandez-Cruz, P., Odriozola-Maritorena, M., Almeida, M., Onety, B., Nicolle, J., Allard, F., Le Dréau, J., & Suárez, E. (2023). A novel multicriteria methodology to assess the renovation of social buildings. Journal of Building Engineering, 77, 107505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2023.107505
  • Francart, N., Polycarpou, K., Malmqvist, T., & Moncaster, A. (2022). Demands, default options and definitions: How artefacts mediate sustainability in public housing projects in Sweden and Cyprus. Energy Research & Social Science, 92, 102765. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2022.102765
  • Galle, W., Debacker, W., De Weerdt, Y., Poppe, J., & De Temmerman, N. (2021). Can Circularity Make Housing Affordable Again? Preliminary Lessons About a Construction Experiment in Flanders Taking a Systems Perspective: Sustainability in Energy and Buildings 2020. Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies, 203, 151–160. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-8783-2_12
  • Gámez-García, Saldaña-Márquez, Gómez-Soberón, Arredondo-Rea, Gómez-Soberón, & Corral-Higuera. (2019). Environmental Challenges in the Residential Sector: Life Cycle Assessment of Mexican Social Housing. Energies, 12(14), 2837. https://doi.org/10.3390/en12142837
  • Gan, X., Zuo, J., Wu, P., Wang, J., Chang, R., & Wen, T. (2017). How affordable housing becomes more sustainable? A stakeholder study. Journal of Cleaner Production, 162, 427–437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.06.048
  • Gargari, C., Bibbiani, C., Fantozzi, F., & Campiotti, C. A. (2016). Environmental Impact of Green Roofing: The Contribute of a Green Roof to the Sustainable use of Natural Resources in a Life Cycle Approach. Agriculture and Agricultural Science Procedia, 8, 646–656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aaspro.2016.02.087
  • Giannetti, B. F., Demétrio, J., Agostinho, F., Almeida, C., & Liu, G. (2017). Towards more sustainable social housing projects: Recognizing the importance of using local resources. Building and Environment, 127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2017.10.033
  • Godyń, Grela, Stajno, & Tokarska. (2020). Sustainable Rainwater Management Concept in a Housing Estate with a Financial Feasibility Assessment and Motivational Rainwater Fee System Efficiency Analysis. Water, 12(1), 151. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12010151
  • Greco, A., & Olivadese, R. (2022). Fostering deep renovation and unburdening homeowners through digital platforms. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1085(1), 012015. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1085/1/012015
  • Guangdong Wu, Duan, K., Zuo, J., Zhao, X., & Tang, D. (2017). Integrated Sustainability Assessment of Public Rental Housing Community Based on a Hybrid Method of AHP-Entropy Weight and Cloud Model. Sustainability, 9(4), Article 4. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9040603
  • Guardigli, L., Bragadin, M. A., Ferrante, A., & Gulli, R. (2019). Life cycle analysis and planning in the renovation process of public housing. Tema: Technology, Engineering, Materials and Architecture, 5(2), 106–119.
  • Guardigli, L., Ferrer, C., Peters, C., Fotopoulou, A., Bragadin, M. A., & Ferrante, A. (2019). Rehabilitation of public housing buildings in a life cycle perspective. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 296(1), 012038. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/296/1/012038
  • Guarini, M. R., & Battisti, F. (2017). A Model to Assess the Feasibility of Public–Private Partnership for Social Housing. Buildings, 7(2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings7020044
  • Guerra-Santin, O., Boess, S., Konstantinou, T., Romero Herrera, N., Klein, T., & Silvester, S. (2017). Designing for residents: Building monitoring and co-creation in social housing renovation in the Netherlands. Energy Research & Social Science, 32, 164–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.03.009
  • Gupta, R., Kapsali, M., & Howard, A. (2018). Evaluating the influence of building fabric, services and occupant related factors on the actual performance of low energy social housing dwellings in UK. Energy and Buildings, 174, 548–562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2018.06.057
  • Hafez, H., El-Mahdy, D., & Marsh, A. T. M. (2023). Barriers and enablers for scaled-up adoption of compressed earth blocks in Egypt. Building Research & Information, 51(7), 783–797. https://doi.org/10.1080/09613218.2023.2237133
  • Hamdan, M., Mirzaei, P., & Gillott, M. (2023). Life Cycle Cost Assessment and Retrofit in Community Scale: A Case Study of Jordan. E3S Web of Conferences, 396, 04012. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202339604012
  • Hamels, S., Himpe, E., Laverge, J., Delghust, M., Van Den Brande, K., Janssens, A., & Albrecht, J. (2021). The use of primary energy factors and CO2 intensities for electricity in the European context—A systematic methodological review and critical evaluation of the contemporary literature. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 146, 111182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111182
  • Havinga, L., Colenbrander, B., & Schellen, H. (2020). Heritage attributes of post-war housing in Amsterdam. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 9(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2019.04.002
  • He, Y., Wang, Y., Song, Z., Yu, H., & Xue, Y. (2023). Study on Carbon Emissions from the Renovation of Old Residential Areas in Cold Regions of China. Sustainability, 15(4), Article 4. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043018
  • Hernández, D., & Phillips, D. (2015). Benefit or burden? Perceptions of energy efficiency efforts among low-income housing residents in New York City. Energy Research & Social Science, 8, 52–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2015.04.010
  • Hjort, B., & Widén, K. (2015). Introduction of Sustainable Low-cost Housing in Ethiopia—an Innovation Diffusion Perspective. Procedia Economics and Finance, 21, 454–460. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(15)00199-9
  • Holopainen, R., Milandru, A., Ahvenniemi, H., & Häkkinen, T. (2016). Feasibility Studies of Energy Retrofits—Case Studies of Nearly Zero-energy Building Renovation. Energy Procedia, 96, 146–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2016.09.116
  • Hyun, H., Lee, Y.-M., Kim, H.-G., & Kim, J.-S. (2021). Framework for Long-Term Public Housing Supply Plan Focusing on Small-Scale Offsite Construction in Seoul. Sustainability, 13(10), 5361. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13105361
  • Jang, H., Ahn, Y., & Roh, S. (2022). Comparison of the Embodied Carbon Emissions and Direct Construction Costs for Modular and Conventional Residential Buildings in South Korea. Buildings, 12(1), 51. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings12010051
  • Jiang, W., Lu Qiu, W., Lin, S.-H., Lv, H., Zhao, X., & Cong, H. (2023). A New Hybrid Decision-Making Model for Promoting Sustainable Social Rental Housing. Sustainability, 15(8), Article 8. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15086420
  • Joglekar, S. N., Kharkar, R. A., Mandavgane, S. A., & Kulkarni, B. D. (2018). Sustainability assessment of brick work for low-cost housing: A comparison between waste based bricks and burnt clay bricks. Sustainable Cities and Society, 37, 396–406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2017.11.025
  • Judson, E. P., Bell, S., Bulkeley, H., Powells, G., & Lyon, S. (2015). The Co-Construction of Energy Provision and Everyday Practice: Integrating Heat Pumps in Social Housing in England. Science & Technology Studies, 28(3), 26–53. https://doi.org/10.23987/sts.55341
  • Kabus, J., & Dziadkiewicz, M. (2023). Modern Management Methods in the Area of Public Housing Resources in the Community. Sustainability, 15(10), Article 10. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15107776
  • Kaewunruen, S., Rungskunroch, P., & Welsh, J. (2019). A Digital-Twin Evaluation of Net Zero Energy Building for Existing Buildings. Sustainability, 11(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11010159
  • Kedir, F., Chen, Q., Hall, D. M., Adey, B. T., & Boyd, R. (2022). Formative scenario analysis of the factors influencing the adoption of industrialised construction in countries with high housing demand—the cases of Ethiopia, Kenya, and South Africa. Construction Management and Economics, 40(9), 690–710. https://doi.org/10.1080/01446193.2022.2098508
  • Kemmer, S., Biotto, C., Chaves, F., Koskela, L., & Fazenda, P. T. (2016). Implementing Last Planner in the Context of Social Housing Retrofit. 24th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction. https://iglc.net/papers/Details/1302
  • Klumbyte, E., Bliudzius, R., & Foikades, P. (2020). A SIPOC based model for the sustainable management of facilities in social housing. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 410, 012081. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/410/1/012081
  • Kosorić, V., Lau, S.-K., Tablada, A., Bieri, M., & M. Nobre, A. (2021). A Holistic Strategy for Successful Photovoltaic (PV) Implementation into Singapore’s Built Environment. Sustainability, 13(11), Article 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13116452
  • Kristiánová, K. (2016). Post-Socialist Transformations of Green Open Spaces in Large Scale Socialist Housing Estates in Slovakia. Procedia Engineering, 161, 1863–1867. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.08.715
  • Larsen, V. G., Antoniucci, V., Tollin, N., Sattrup, P. A., Jens, K., Birkved, M., Holmboe, T., & Marella, G. (2023). A Methodological Framework to Foster Social Value Creation in Architectural Practice. Sustainability, 15(3), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15031849
  • Le, L. H., Ta, A. D., & Dang, H. Q. (2016). Building up a System of Indicators to Measure Social Housing Quality in Vietnam. Procedia Engineering, 142, 116–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.02.021
  • Lea, T., Moskos, M., Brambilla, A., King, S., Habibis, D., Benedict, R., Phibbs, P., Sun, C., & Torzillo, P. (2021). Sustainable Indigenous housing in regional and remote Australia. AHURI Final Report, 368. https://doi.org/10.18408/ahuri7323701
  • Lee, J., Kim, J., Lee, H., Lee, Y.-M., & Kim, H.-G. (2019). Small-Scale Public Rental Housing Development Using Modular Construction—Lessons learned from Case Studies in Seoul, Korea. Sustainability, 11(4), 1120. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11041120
  • Lespagnard, M., Galle, W., & De Temmerman, N. (2023). Visualizing Equitable Housing: A Prototype for a Framework. Sustainability, 15(5), 4110. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15054110
  • Lima, M. D. F. D. B., Souza, Á. N. D., Teixeira, D. E., Souza, H. J. D., Matricardi, E. A. T., Miguel, É. P., Borges, L. A. C., & Silva, M. L. D. (2023). A SWOT Analysis of AWH Project Implementation in the Brazilian Amazon as Perceived by Affordable Housing Stakeholders. Forests, 14(3), 594. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14030594
  • Liu, X., Dong, J., Cui, P., Wang, M., & Guo, X. (2022). Collaborative Supply Mechanism of Government-Subsidized Rental Housing from the Perspective of Tripartite Evolutionary Game in Metropolitan Cities of China. Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience, 2022, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/4895099
  • Llera-Sastresa, E., Scarpellini, S., Rivera-Torres, P., Aranda, J., Zabalza-Bribián, I., & Aranda-Usón, A. (2017). Energy Vulnerability Composite Index in Social Housing, from a Household Energy Poverty Perspective. Sustainability, 9(5), 691. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9050691
  • Longhurst, N., & Hargreaves, T. (2019). Emotions and fuel poverty: The lived experience of social housing tenants in the United Kingdom. Energy Research & Social Science, 56, 101207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2019.05.017
  • López-Escamilla, Á., Herrera-Limones, R., León-Rodríguez, Á. L., & Torres-García, M. (2020). Environmental Comfort as a Sustainable Strategy for Housing Integration: The AURA 1.0 Prototype for Social Housing. Applied Sciences, 10(21), Article 21. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10217734
  • Lucchi, E., & Delera, A. C. (2020). Enhancing the Historic Public Social Housing through a User-Centered Design-Driven Approach. Buildings, 10(9), Article 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings10090159
  • Ma, M., Tam, V. W., Le, K. N., Butera, A., Li, W., & Wang, X. (2023). Comparative analysis on international construction and demolition waste management policies and laws for policy makers in china. journal of civil engineering and management, 29(2), 107–130. https://doi.org/10.3846/jcem.2023.16581
  • MacAskill, S., Stewart, R., Roca, E., Liu, B., & Sahin, O. (2019). Green building, split-incentives and affordable rental housing policy. Housing Studies, 36, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673037.2019.1677861
  • Macias, J., Iturburu, L., Rodriguez, C., Agdas, D., Boero, A., & Soriano, G. (2017). Embodied and operational energy assessment of different construction methods employed on social interest dwellings in Ecuador. Energy and Buildings, 151, 107–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.06.016
  • Mancini, F., Salvo, S., & Piacentini, V. (2016). Issues of Energy Retrofitting of a Modern Public Housing Estates: The ‘Giorgio Morandi’ Complex at Tor Sapienza, Rome, 1975–1979. Energy Procedia, 101, 1111–1118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2016.11.151
  • Mangold, M., Österbring, M., Overland, C., Johansson, T., & Wallbaum, H. (2018). Building Ownership, Renovation Investments, and Energy Performance—A Study of Multi-Family Dwellings in Gothenburg. Sustainability, 10(5), 1684. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10051684
  • Mangold, M., Österbring, M., Wallbaum, H., Thuvander, L., & Femenias, P. (2016). Socio-economic impact of renovation and energy retrofitting of the Gothenburg building stock. Energy and Buildings, 123, 41–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2016.04.033
  • Maqsood, M., & Zumelzu, A. (2021). Evaluación de la sostenibilidad de forma urbana en conjuntos de Vivienda social. Revista de Urbanismo, 44, 149. https://doi.org/10.5354/0717-5051.2021.54756
  • Marrero, M., Rivero-Camacho, C., & Alba-Rodríguez, M. D. (2020). What are we discarding during the life cycle of a building? Case studies of social housing in Andalusia, Spain. Waste Management, 102, 391–403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2019.11.002
  • Martín, I., & Domínguez, G. (2016). Adaptive Reuse: The Modern Movement towards the Future. Transforming to Preserve. An Inquiry into the Complexity of Heritage Values in Modern Social Housing: Hortaleza’s UVA, Madrid Proceedings of the 14th International Docomomo Conference—(2016). https://portalcientifico.upm.es/en/ipublic/item/9277209
  • Martínez-Corral, A., & Cuéllar, D. (2021). When construction was linear. Analysis of the energy sustainability of social housing in Spain (1939–1989). VITRUVIO—International Journal of Architectural Technology and Sustainability, 6(1), 38. https://doi.org/10.4995/vitruvio-ijats.2021.15383
  • Martínez-Rocamora, A., Rivera-Gómez, C., Galán-Marín, C., & Marrero, M. (2021). Environmental benchmarking of building typologies through BIM-based combinatorial case studies. Automation in Construction, 132, 103980. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2021.103980
  • Marzouk, M., Azab, S., & Metawie, M. (2016). Framework for Sustainable Low-Income Housing Projects Using Building Information Modeling. Journal of Environmental Informatics, 28, 25–38. https://doi.org/10.3808/jei.201600332
  • Mata, É., Peñaloza, D., Sandkvist, F., & Nyberg, T. (2021). What is stopping low-carbon buildings? A global review of enablers and barriers. Energy Research & Social Science, 82, 102261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2021.102261
  • Medrano Gomez, L., & Izquierdo, A. (2017). Social housing retrofit: Improving energy efficiency and thermal comfort for the housing stock recovery in Mexico. Energy Procedia, 121, 41–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2017.08.006
  • Mercader-Moyano, P., Anaya-Durán, P., & Romero-Cortés, A. (2021). Eco-Efficient Ventilated Facades Based on Circular Economy for Residential Buildings as an Improvement of Energy Conditions. Energies, 14(21), 7266. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14217266
  • Mikhaelovna-Krygina, A., Mikhaelovna-Krygina, N., & Yurevna-Aksenteva, I. (2017). Innovative low-rise housing construction in Russia. Istrazivanja i Projektovanja Za Privredu, 15(3), 307–312. https://doi.org/10.5937/jaes15-14672
  • Mite-Anastacio, F., Tello-Ayala, K., García-Troncoso, N., Silva, C. E., Malaga-Chuquitaype, C., Arévalo, K., & Villao, D. (2022). Structural behavior of cemented bahareque for social housing: A case study in Guayaquil City, Ecuador. Frontiers in Built Environment, 8. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fbuil.2022.922397
  • Moore, T., & Doyon, A. (2023). Providing Sustainable Housing through Sustainability Transitions. In T. Moore & A. Doyon, A Transition to Sustainable Housing (pp. 123–146). Springer Nature Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-2760-9_5
  • Moore, T., Nicholls, L., Strengers, Y., Maller, C., & Horne, R. (2017). Benefits and challenges of energy efficient social housing. Energy Procedia, 121, 300–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2017.08.031
  • Moran, P., O’Connell, J., & Goggins, J. (2020). Sustainable energy efficiency retrofits as residenial buildings move towards nearly zero energy building (NZEB) standards. Energy and Buildings, 211, 109816. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2020.109816
  • Mørck, O. C. (2016). Concept Development and Technology Choices for the More-connect Pilot Energy Renovation of Three Apartment Blocks in Denmark. Energy Procedia, 96, 738–744. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2016.09.136
  • Nadal, A., Cerón-Palma, I., García-Gómez, C., Pérez-Sánchez, M., Rodríguez-Labajos, B., Cuerva, E., Josa, A., & Rieradevall, J. (2018). Social perception of urban agriculture in Latin-America. A case study in Mexican social housing. Land Use Policy, 76, 719–734. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.02.055
  • Nadal, A., Rodríguez-Cadena, D., Pons, O., Cuerva, E., Josa, A., & Rieradevall, J. (2019). Feasibility assessment of rooftop greenhouses in Latin America. The case study of a social neighborhood in Quito, Ecuador. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 44, 126389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2019.126389
  • Nadal, A., Rodríguez-Labajos, B., Cuerva, E., Josa, A., & Rieradevall, J. (2022). Influence of social housing models in the development of urban agriculture in Mexico. Land Use Policy, 122, 106391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2022.106391
  • Napoli, G., Giuffrida, S., & Trovato, M. (2019). Efficiency versus Fairness in the Management of Public Housing Assets in Palermo (Italy). Sustainability, 11(4), 1199. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11041199
  • Navrátil, J., Klusáček, P., Martinát, S., & Dvořák, P. (2021). Emergence of Centralized (Collective) and Decentralized (Individual) Environmentally Friendly Solutions during the Regeneration of a Residential Building in a Post-Socialist City. Land, 10(5), 524. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10050524
  • Ochoa, R., Guerrero, T., & Velasco, G. (2017). Housing Manufacturing in Mexico: Building Efficient Houses in Inefficient Locations? Procedia Manufacturing, 8, 89–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2017.02.011
  • Okoye, P. U., & Ngwu, C. (2021). Assessing the adequacy and sustainability performance of multi-family residential buildings in Anambra State, Nigeria. Regional Sustainability, 2(1), 23–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.regsus.2021.01.003
  • Oliveira, R., Vicente, R., Almeida, R. M. S. F., & Figueiredo, A. (2021). The Importance of In Situ Characterisation for the Mitigation of Poor Indoor Environmental Conditions in Social Housing. Sustainability, 13(17), 9836. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13179836
  • Oyebanji, A. O., Liyanage, C., & Akintoye, A. (2017). Critical Success Factors (CSFs) for achieving sustainable social housing (SSH). International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment, 6(1), 216–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2017.03.006
  • Pannier, M.-L., Recht, T., Robillart, M., Schalbart, P., Peuportier, B., & Mora, L. (2021). Identifying optimal renovation schedules for building portfolios: Application in a social housing context under multi-year funding constraints. Energy and Buildings, 250, 111290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2021.111290
  • Park, S., Ahn, Y., & Lee, S. (2018). Analyzing the Finishing Works Service Life Pattern of Public Housing in South Korea by Probabilistic Approach. Sustainability, 10(12), 4469. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10124469
  • Paulino, D. M. S., Ligler, H., & Napolitano, R. (2023). A Grammar-Based Approach for Generating Spatial Layout Solutions for the Adaptive Reuse of Sobrado Buildings. Buildings, 13(3), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13030722
  • Pinzon Amorocho, J. A., & Hartmann, T. (2022). A multi-criteria decision-making framework for residential building renovation using pairwise comparison and TOPSIS methods. Journal of Building Engineering, 53, 104596. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2022.104596
  • Pleshkanovska, A., & BIRIUK, S. (2021). “Outdated Housing Stocks” as an Objects of Complex Recon-struction of Programs and Pro-jects: Challenges for Ukraine. Journal of Urban and Regional Analysis, 13. https://doi.org/10.37043/JURA.2021.13.2.4
  • Porras-Salazar, J. A., Contreras-Espinoza, S., Cartes, I., Piggot-Navarrete, J., & Pérez-Fargallo, A. (2020). Energy poverty analyzed considering the adaptive comfort of people living in social housing in the central-south of Chile. Energy and Buildings, 223, 110081. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2020.110081
  • Praene, J. P., Fakra, D. A. H., Benard, F., Ayagapin, L., & Rachadi, M. N. M. (2021). Comoros’s energy review for promoting renewable energy sources. Renewable Energy, 169, 885–893. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2021.01.067
  • Puri, V., Chakrabortty, P., Anand, S., & Majumdar, S. (2017). Bamboo reinforced prefabricated wall panels for low cost housing. Journal of Building Engineering, 9, 52–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2016.11.010
  • Rau, H., Moran, P., Manton, R., & Goggins, J. (2020). Changing energy cultures? Household energy use before and after a building energy efficiency retrofit. Sustainable Cities and Society, 54, 101983. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101983
  • Ritzen, M., Oorschot, J. V., Cammans, M., Segers, M., Wieland, T., Scheer, P., Creugers, B., & Abujidi, N. (2019). Circular (de)construction in the Superlocal project. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 225, 012048. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/225/1/012048
  • Robayo-Salazar, R. A., Valencia-Saavedra, W., Ramírez-Benavides, S., Mejía De Gutiérrez, R., & Orobio, A. (2021). Eco-House Prototype Constructed with Alkali-Activated Blocks: Material Production, Characterization, Design, Construction, and Environmental Impact. Materials, 14(5), 1275. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14051275
  • Ruggeri, A. G., Gabrielli, L., & Scarpa, M. (2020). Energy Retrofit in European Building Portfolios: A Review of Five Key Aspects. Sustainability, 12(18), 7465. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12187465
  • Salati, M., Bragança, L., & Mateus, R. (2022). Sustainability Assessment on an Urban Scale: Context, Challenges, and Most Relevant Indicators. Applied System Innovation, 5(2), 41. https://doi.org/10.3390/asi5020041
  • Saldaña Márquez, H., Gómez-Soberón, J. M., Arredondo-Rea, S. P., Gámez García, D. C., & Corral-Higuera, R. (2018). Sustainable social housing: The comparison of the Mexican funding program for housing solutions and building sustainability rating systems. Building and Environment, 133, 103–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.02.017
  • Saldaña-Márquez, H., Gámez-García, D., Gómez-Soberón, J., Arredondo-Rea, S., Corral-Higuera, R., & Gómez-Soberón, M. (2019). Housing Indicators for Sustainable Cities in Middle-Income Countries through the Residential Urban Environment Recognized Using Single-Family Housing Rating Systems. Sustainability, 11(16), 4276. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11164276
  • Sanders, F., & Overtoom, M. (2022). Unlocking Grey Scientific Data on Resident Behaviour to Increase the Climate Impact of Dutch Sustainable Housing. Urban Planning, 7(2), 70–80. https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v7i2.4865
  • Santana, W. B., & Maués, L. M. F. (2022). Environmental Protection Is Not Relevant in the Perceived Quality of Life of Low-Income Housing Residents: A PLS-SEM Approach in the Brazilian Amazon. Sustainability, 14(20), 13171. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142013171
  • Santos, L. L., Pontes, Í. S., Bastos, L. P., De Melo, G. V., & Barata, M. (2021). Acoustic performance of social housings in Brazil: Assessment of lightweight expanded polystyrene concrete as resilient subfloor. Journal of Building Engineering, 41, 102442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2021.102442
  • Sattler & Österreicher. (2019). Assessment of Sustainable Construction Measures in Building Refurbishment—Life Cycle Comparison of Conventional and Multi-Active Façade Systems in a Social Housing Complex. Sustainability, 11(16), 4487. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11164487
  • Scuderi, G. (2019). Designing Flexibility and Adaptability: The Answer to Integrated Residential Building Retrofit. Designs, 3(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.3390/designs3010003
  • Serrano-Jiménez, A., Lizana, J., Molina-Huelva, M., & Barrios-Padura, Á. (2020). Indoor environmental quality in social housing with elderly occupants in Spain: Measurement results and retrofit opportunities. Journal of Building Engineering, 30, 101264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2020.101264
  • Serugga, J., Kagioglou, M., & Tzortzopoulos, P. (2020). Value Generation in Front-End Design of Social Housing with QFD and Multiattribute Utility Theory. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 146(4), 04020019. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001787
  • Sirombo, E., Filippi, M., Catalano, A., & Sica, A. (2017). Building monitoring system in a large social housing intervention in Northern Italy. Energy Procedia, 140, 386–397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2017.11.151
  • Sobieraj, J., & Metelski, D. (2022). Project Risk in the Context of Construction Schedules—Combined Monte Carlo Simulation and Time at Risk (TaR) Approach: Insights from the Fort Bema Housing Estate Complex. Applied Sciences, 12(3), 1044. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12031044
  • Sojkova, K., Volf, M., Lupisek, A., Bolliger, R., & Vachal, T. (2019). Selection of Favourable Concept of Energy Retrofitting Solution for Social Housing in the Czech Republic Based on Economic Parameters, Greenhouse Gases, and Primary Energy Consumption. Sustainability, 11(22), 6482. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11226482
  • Srivastava, M., & Kumar, V. (2018). The methods of using low cost housing techniques in India. Journal of Building Engineering, 15, 102–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2017.11.001
  • Suszyńska, K., Lis, P., & Rataj, Z. (2022). My home is no longer my castle. Collaborative housing as an element of sharing economy. Acta Scientiarum Polonorum Administratio Locorum, 21(3), 447–457. https://doi.org/10.31648/aspal.7645
  • Sutrisno, Asmal, I. J., Radja, A. M., & Yahya, M. Y. (2023). The Problem of Cheap Housıng Development for Low-Income Communıtıes ın Urban; Transformatıon of the Transıtıonal Space and Revıew for Further Research Posıtıons. Journal of Law and Sustainable Development, 11(2), e556. https://doi.org/10.55908/sdgs.v11i2.556
  • Szagri, D., & Szalay, Z. (2022). Theoretical fragility curves—A novel approach to assess heat vulnerability of residential buildings. Sustainable Cities and Society, 83, 103969. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2022.103969
  • Tello-Ayala, K., Garcia-Troncoso, N., Silva, C. E., Zúñiga-Olvera, C., Narvaez-Moran, J., Malaga-Chuquitaype, C., & Mouka, T. (2023). Comparative analysis of the sustainability and seismic performance of a social interest house using RC moment frames and bahareque as structural systems. Frontiers in Built Environment, 9, 1150826. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2023.1150826
  • Tisov, A., Kuusk, K., Navarro Escudero, M., Niki Assimakopoulos, M., Papadaki, D., Pihelo, P., Op ‘T Veld, P., & Kalamees, T. (2020). Driving decarbonisation of the EU building stock by enhancing a consumer centred and locally based circular renovation process. E3S Web of Conferences, 172, 18006. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202017218006
  • Toboso-Chavero, S., Madrid-López, C., Gabarrell Durany, X., & Villalba, G. (2021). Incorporating user preferences in rooftop food-energy-water production through integrated sustainability assessment. Environmental Research Communications, 3(6), 065001. https://doi.org/10.1088/2515-7620/abffa5
  • Toboso-Chavero, S., Villalba, G., Gabarrell Durany, X., & Madrid-López, C. (2021). More than the sum of the parts: System analysis of the usability of roofs in housing estates. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 25(5), 1284–1299. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.13114
  • Tofiluk, A., Knyziak, P., & Krentowski, J. (2019). Revitalization of Twentieth-Century Prefabricated Housing Estates as Interdisciplinary Issue. IOP Conference Series Materials Science and Engineering, 471. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/471/11/112096
  • Trancossi, M., Cannistraro, M., & Pascoa, J. (2018). Can constructal law and exergy analysis produce a robust design method that couples with industry 4.0 paradigms? The case of a container house. Mathematical Modelling of Engineering Problems, 5(4), 303–312. https://doi.org/10.18280/mmep.050405
  • Triana, M. A., Lamberts, R., & Sassi, P. (2018). Should we consider climate change for Brazilian social housing? Assessment of energy efficiency adaptation measures. Energy and Buildings, 158, 1379–1392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2017.11.003
  • Tsenkova, S. (2020). Transformative change: Energy-efficiency and social housing retrofits in Canadian cities. In Transforming Social Housing. Routledge.
  • Tsuang, H. C., & Peng, K.-H. (2018). The Livability of Social Housing Communities in Taiwan: A Case Study of Taipei City. International Review for Spatial Planning and Sustainable Development, 6, 4–21. https://doi.org/10.14246/irspsd.6.3_4
  • Ürge-Vorsatz, D., Khosla, R., Bernhardt, R., Chan, Y. C., Vérez, D., Hu, S., & Cabeza, L. F. (2020). Advances Toward a Net-Zero Global Building Sector. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 45(1), 227–269. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-012420-045843
  • Van Bortel, G., & Gruis, V. (2019). Innovative Arrangements between Public and Private Actors in Affordable Housing Provision: Examples from Austria, England and Italy. Urban Science, 3(2), 52. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci3020052
  • Van Bueren, B. J. A., Leenders, M. A. A. M., & Nordling, T. E. M. (2019). Case Study: Taiwan’s pathway into a circular future for buildings. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 225, 012060. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/225/1/012060
  • Van De Moortel, E., Allacker, K., De Troyer, F., Schoofs, E., & Stijnen, L. (2022). Dynamic Versus Static Life Cycle Assessment of Energy Renovation for Residential Buildings. Sustainability, 14(11), 6838. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14116838
  • Vestergaard, I. (2022). Reusing concrete panels from the industrial mass housing of the 1960s. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1122(1), 012009. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1122/1/012009
  • Vitorio Junior, P. C., Yepes, V., & Kripka, M. (2022). Comparison of Brazilian Social Interest Housing Projects Considering Sustainability. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(10), 6213. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19106213
  • Vollmer, M., Harter, H., Theilig, K., Kierdorf, D., & Lang, W. (2021). Implementation of strategies for the realization of ecologically and economically optimized serial type house buildings for social housing. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2042(1), 012173. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2042/1/012173
  • Wang, Y., Aslani, F., Dyskin, A., & Pasternak, E. (2023). Digital Twin Applications in 3D Concrete Printing. Sustainability, 15(3), 2124. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15032124
  • Winston, N. (2021). Sustainable community development: Integrating social and environmental sustainability for sustainable housing and communities. Sustainable Development, 30. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2238
  • Xie, C., Jim, C. Y., Yi, X., Liu, D., & Guo, X. (2021). Spatio-Temporal Patterns of Tree Diversity and Distribution in Urban Resettlement Areas for Displaced Farmers. Forests, 12(6), 766. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12060766
  • Yap, K. S. (2016). The enabling strategy and its discontent: Low-income housing policies and practices in Asia. Habitat International, 54, 166–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2015.11.026
  • Zanganeh Shahraki, S., Ahmadifard, N., Farhadikhah, H., Mehrabani, B. F., Haydari, A., Abdali, Y., Fallah, V. A., Farhadi, E., Cividino, S., Vinci, S., & Salvati, L. (2020). Spatial Planning, Urban Governance and the Economic Context: The Case of ‘Mehr’ Housing Plan, Iran. Land, 9(5), 169. https://doi.org/10.3390/land9050169
  • Zea Escamilla, E., Habert, G., & Wohlmuth, E. (2016). When CO2 counts: Sustainability assessment of industrialized bamboo as an alternative for social housing programs in the Philippines. Building and Environment, 103, 44–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.04.003
  • Zeeman, H., Wright, C. J., & Hellyer, T. (2016). Developing design guidelines for inclusive housing: A multi-stakeholder approach using a Delphi method. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 31(4), 761–772. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10901-016-9499-0
  • Zhang, G., Xu, K., Liu, Z., Huang, R., Li, B., & Wang, R. (2023). Policy-based initiatives on promoting China’s affordable housing: Challenges and opportunities. Developments in the Built Environment, 16, 100222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dibe.2023.100222
  • Zr, D. L., Wahyuni, Y. S., & Triyadi, S. (2017). Embodied Energy Calculation in Mitigating Environmental Impact of Low-Cost Housing Construction. MATEC Web of Conferences, 138, 01001. https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201713801001
  • Zuraida, S., & Larasati Zr, D. (2015). The Assessment of Marginal Prevention Costs on Bamboo Preservation Method. Procedia Environmental Sciences, 28, 789–798.

References

  1. Garg, R. World Economic Forum. Here’s How to Create a Circular System for the Built Environment. 2022. Available online: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/authors/ritu-garg (accessed on 6 November 2023).
  2. European Union. Europian Commission. In Focus: Energy Efficiency in Buildings. 02 2020. Available online: https://commission.europa.eu/news/focus-energy-efficiency-buildings-2020-02-17_en (accessed on 6 November 2023).
  3. Nejat, P.; Jomehzadeh, F.; Taheri, M.M.; Gohari, M.; Majid, M.Z.A. A global review of energy consumption, CO2 emissions and policy in the residential sector (with an overview of the top ten CO2 emitting countries). Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 43, 843–862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. European Parlament. Social Housing in the EU. FRDB. Available online: https://www.frdb.org/pubblicazioni/social-housing-in-the-eu/ (accessed on 22 January 2024).
  5. Granath Hansson, A.; Lundgren, B. Defining Social Housing: A Discussion on the Suitable Criteria. Hous. Theory Soc. 2018, 36, 149–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Habitat for Humanity GB. The World’s Largest Slums: Dharavi, Kibera, Khayelitsha & Neza. 2017. Available online: https://www.habitatforhumanity.org.uk/blog/2017/12/the-worlds-largest-slums-dharavi-kibera-khayelitsha-neza/ (accessed on 6 November 2023).
  7. Stachera, T.J.; Casagrande, E. Avaliação de Emissões de CO2 na Construção Civil: Um Estudo de Caso da Habitação de Interesse Social no Paraná. Presented at the Engema-Encontro Nacional sobre Gestão Empresarial e Meio Ambiente in Curitiba. Universidade Tecnológica Federal do Paraná. 2007. Available online: http://repositorio.utfpr.edu.br:8080/jspui/handle/1/27142 (accessed on 14 November 2023).
  8. Gianfrate, V.; Piccardo, C.; Longo, D.; Giachetta, A. Rethinking social housing: Behavioural patterns and technological innovations. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2017, 33, 102–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Kirchherr, J.; Reike, D.; Hekkert, M. Conceptualizing the circular economy: An analysis of 114 definitions. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2017, 127, 221–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. ECESP. Circular Buildings and Infrastructure. State of Play Report ECESP; Leadership Group on Buildings and Infrastructure 2021. 2022. Available online: https://eeb.org/library/circular-buildings-and-infrastructure/ (accessed on 16 November 2023).
  11. Marchesi, M.; Tweed, C. Social innovation for a circular economy in social housing. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2021, 71, 102925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Çetin, S.; Gruis, V.; Straub, A. Towards Circular Social Housing: An Exploration of Practices, Barriers, and Enablers. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Marchesi, M.; Tweed, C.; Gerber, D. Applying Circular Economy Principles to Urban Housing. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2020, 588, 052065. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Larsen, V.G.; Tollin, N.; Antoniucci, V.; Birkved, M.; Sattrup, P.A.; Holmboe, T.; Marella, G. Filling the gaps Circular transition of affordable housing in Denmark. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2022, 1078, 012078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Liu, S.; Zhang, Z.; Xu, G.; Zhang, Z.; Li, H. How Promotion Incentives and Environmental Regulations Affect China’s Environmental Pollution? Sustainability 2021, 13, 2907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Liang, J.; He, P.; Qiu, Y.L. Energy transition, public expressions, and local officials’ incentives: Social media evidence from the coal-to-gas transition in China. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 298, 126771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Williams, J. Circular cities. Urban Stud. 2019, 56, 2746–2762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Zairul, M.; Wamelink, H.; Gruis, V.; Heintz, J.; Nasir, N. The circular economy approach in a flexible housing project: A proposal for affordable housing solution in Malaysia. Int. J. Eng. Technol. 2018, 7, 287–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Mazur, Ł. Circular economy in housing architecture: Methods of implementation. ACTA Sci. Pol.—Archit. Bud. 2021, 20, 65–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Higgins, J.P.T.; Thomas, J.; Chandler, J.; HiggChandler, J.; Cumpston, M.; Li, T.; Page, M.J.; Welch, V.A. (Eds.) Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 6.4 (Updated August 2023); Cochrane: Chichester, UK, 2023; Available online: www.training.cochrane.org/handbook (accessed on 6 November 2023).
  21. Baas, J.; Schotten, M.; Plume, A.; Côté, G.; Karimi, R. Scopus as a curated, high-quality bibliometric data source for academic research in quantitative science studies. Quant. Sci. Stud. 2020, 1, 377–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Rheingantz, P.A.; Azevedo, G.A.; Brasileiro, A.; Alcantara, D.D.; Queiroz, M. Observando a Qualidade do Lugar: Procedimentos para a Avaliação Pós-Ocupação; Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Faculdade de Arquitetura e Urbanismo, Pós-Graduação em Arquitetura: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2009; ISBN 978-85-88341-17-3. [Google Scholar]
  23. European Union. European Comission. European Climate Law. 2021. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32021R1119 (accessed on 6 November 2023).
  24. Siqueira-Gay, J.; Sánchez, L.E. Mainstreaming environmental issues into housing plans: The approach of Strategic Environmental Assessment. Environ. Impact Assess. Rev. 2019, 77, 145–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. He, Q.; Ng, S.T.; Hossain, M.U.; Augenbroe, G.L. A Data-driven Approach for Sustainable Building Retrofit—A Case Study of Different Climate Zones in China. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Dell’Isola, M.; Ficco, G.; Canale, L.; Frattolillo, A.; Bertini, I. A new heat cost allocation method for social housing. Energy Build. 2018, 172, 67–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Belpoliti, V.; Bizzarri, G. A parametric method to assess the energy performance of the social housing stock and simulate suitable retrofit scenarios: An Italian case study. Energy Build. 2015, 96, 261–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Sborz, J.; Kalbusch, A.; Henning, E. A Review on Domestic Hot Water Consumption in Social Housing. Water 2022, 14, 2699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Rosso, F.; Peduzzi, A.; Diana, L.; Cascone, S.; Cecere, C. A Sustainable Approach towards the Retrofit of the Public Housing Building Stock: Energy-Architectural Experimental and Numerical Analysis. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Kumar, A.R.; Ramakrishnan, M. A scoping review on recent advancements in domestic applications of solar thermal systems. J. Therm. Eng. 2022, 8, 426–444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Garay, R.M.; Nidia Pino, G. Acoustic Behavior in Three Types of Housing: Brick Social Housing, Structural Insulated Panel (SIP) Emergency Housing and Mediagua Emergency Housing. Rev. Constr. 2019, 18, 96–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Barnaś, K.; Jeleński, T.; Nowak-Ocłoń, M.; Racoń-Leja, K.; Radziszewska-Zielina, E.; Szewczyk, B.; Śladowski, G.; Toś, C.; Varbanov, P.S. Algorithm for the comprehensive thermal retrofit of housing stock aided by renewable energy supply: A sustainable case for Krakow. Energy 2023, 263, 125774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Dobrzycki, A.; Kurz, D.; Mikulski, S.; Wodnicki, G. Analysis of the Impact of Building Integrated Photovoltaics (BIPV) on Reducing the Demand for Electricity and Heat in Buildings Located in Poland. Energies 2020, 13, 2549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Morey, J.; Beizaee, A.; Wright, A. An investigation into overheating in social housing dwellings in central England. Build. Environ. 2020, 176, 106814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Bienvenido-Huertas, D. Analysis of the Relationship of the Improvement of Façades and Thermal Bridges of Spanish Building Stock with the Mitigation of Its Energy and Environmental Impact. Energies 2020, 13, 4499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Chwieduk, D.; Chwieduk, B. Application of Heat Pumps in New Housing Estates in Cities Suburbs as an Means of Energy Transformation in Poland. Energies 2023, 16, 3495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Chippagiri, R.; Gavali, H.R.; Ralegaonkar, R.V.; Riley, M.; Shaw, A.; Bras, A. Application of Sustainable Prefabricated Wall Technology for Energy Efficient Social Housing. Sustainability 2021, 13, 1195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Bienvenido-Huertas, D.; Sánchez-García, D.; Rubio-Bellido, C.; Pulido-Arcas, J.A. Applying the mixed-mode with an adaptive approach to reduce the energy poverty in social dwellings: The case of Spain. Energy 2021, 237, 121636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Tarek, D.; Ahmed, M.M.; Hussein, H.S.; Zeyad, A.M.; Al-Enizi, A.M.; Yousef, A.; Ragab, A. Building envelope optimization using geopolymer bricks to improve the energy efficiency of residential buildings in hot arid regions. Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 2022, 17, e01657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Romero Quidel, G.; Soto Acuña, M.J.; Rojas Herrera, C.J.; Rodríguez Neira, K.; Cárdenas-Ramírez, J.P. Assessment of Modular Construction System Made with Low Environmental Impact Construction Materials for Achieving Sustainable Housing Projects. Sustainability 2023, 15, 8386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Rodriguez Miranda, S.; Gamboa, G.O.; Zamora-Antuñano, M.A.; Farrera-Vázquez, N.; García-García, R. CFD Evaluation of Thermal Conditioning in a House of Social Interest with a Solar Chimney Arrangement in Guanajuato, Mexico. Processes 2023, 11, 1286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Widera, B. Comparative analysis of user comfort and thermal performance of six types of vernacular dwellings as the first step towards climate resilient, sustainable and bioclimatic architecture in western sub-Saharan Africa. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 140, 110736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Yang, Y.; Javanroodi, K.; Nik, V.M. Climate change and energy performance of European residential building stocks—A comprehensive impact assessment using climate big data from the coordinated regional climate downscaling experiment. Appl. Energy 2021, 298, 117246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Pérez-Fargallo, A.; Pulido-Arcas, J.A.; Rubio-Bellido, C.; Trebilcock, M.; Piderit, B.; Attia, S. Development of a new adaptive comfort model for low income housing in the central-south of chile. Energy Build. 2018, 178, 94–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Mastrucci, A.; Rao, N.D. Decent housing in the developing world: Reducing life-cycle energy requirements. Energy Build. 2017, 152, 629–642. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Mercader-Moyano, P.; Esquivias, P.M.; Muntean, R. Eco-Efficient Analysis of a Refurbishment Proposal for a Social Housing. Sustainability 2020, 12, 6725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Calderón, C.; Beltrán, M.R. Effects of fabric retrofit insulation in a UK high-rise social housing building on temperature take-back. Energy Build. 2018, 173, 470–488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Belucio, M.; Rodrigues, C.; Antunes, C.H.; Freire, F.; Dias, L.C. Eco-efficiency in early design decisions: A multimethodology approach. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 283, 124630. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Dominguez-Delgado, A.; Domínguez-Torres, H.; Domínguez-Torres, C.-A. Energy and Economic Life Cycle Assessment of Cool Roofs Applied to the Refurbishment of Social Housing in Southern Spain. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Larrea-Sáez, L.; Cuevas, C.; Casas-Ledón, Y. Energy and environmental assessment of the chilean social housing: Effect of insulation materials and climates. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 392, 136234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Sánchez, C.S.G.; González, F.J.N.; Aja, A.H. Energy poverty methodology based on minimal thermal habitability conditions for low income housing in Spain. Energy Build. 2018, 169, 127–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Teresa Pintanel, M.; Martínez-Gracia, A.; Uche, J.; Del Amo, A.; Bayod-Rújula, Á.A.; Usón, S.; Arauzo, I. Energy and environmental benefits of an integrated solar photovoltaic and thermal hybrid, seasonal storage and heat pump system for social housing. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2022, 213, 118662. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Moortel, E.V.D.; Allacker, K.; Troyer, F.D.; Stijnen, L.; Schoofs, E. Energy Renovation of Social Housing: Finding a Balance between Increasing Insulation and Improving Heating System Efficiency. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2019, 290, 012137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. López-Mesa, B.; Monzón-Chavarrías, M.; Espinosa-Fernández, A. Energy Retrofit of Social Housing with Cultural Value in Spain: Analysis of Strategies Conserving the Original Image vs. Coordinating Its Modification. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Shen, K.; Cheng, C.; Li, X.; Zhang, Z. Environmental Cost-Benefit Analysis of Prefabricated Public Housing in Beijing. Sustainability 2019, 11, 207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Fernandez, L.I.C.; Caldas, L.R.; Mendoza Reales, O.A. Environmental evaluation of 3D printed concrete walls considering the life cycle perspective in the context of social housing. J. Build. Eng. 2023, 74, 106915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Famiglietti, J.; Gerevini, L.; Spirito, G.; Pozzi, M.; Dénarié, A.; Scoccia, R.; Motta, M. Environmental Life Cycle Assessment scenarios for a district heating network. An Italian case study. Energy Rep. 2021, 7, 368–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Velázquez Robles, J.F.; Picó, E.C.; Hosseini, S.M.A. Environmental performance assessment: A comparison and improvement of three existing social housing projects. Clean. Environ. Syst. 2022, 5, 100077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Wu, F.; Liu, Y.; Zeng, Y.; Yan, H.; Zhang, Y.; Li, L.-H. Evaluation of the Human Settlements Environment of Public Housing Community: A Case Study of Guangzhou. Sustainability 2020, 12, 7361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Mouffok, M.; Aidaoui, L.; Zemmouri, N. Evaluation Study of Energy Performance and Conformity to Regulations for Ordinary and HEP Housings: Case Study Based on Measurements at Djelfa City, Algeria. Instrum. Mes. Métrologie 2019, 18, 171–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Monge Palma, R.; Sánchez Ramos, J.; Guerrero Delgado, M.C.; Palomo Amores, T.R.; D’Angelo, G.; Álvarez Domínguez, S. Extending the concept of high-performance buildings to existing dwellings. Energy Build. 2023, 296, 113431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Martínez-Gracia, A.; Usón, S.; Pintanel, M.T.; Uche, J.; Bayod-Rújula, Á.A.; Del Amo, A. Exergy Assessment and Thermo-Economic Analysis of Hybrid Solar Systems with Seasonal Storage and Heat Pump Coupling in the Social Housing Sector in Zaragoza. Energies 2021, 14, 1279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Lowes, R.; Rosenow, J.; Qadrdan, M.; Wu, J. Hot stuff: Research and policy principles for heat decarbonisation through smart electrification. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2020, 70, 101735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Kim, K.P.; Park, K.S. Housing Information Modelling for BIM-embedded Housing Refurbishment. J. Facil. Manag. 2018, 16, 299–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Rouleau, J.; Gosselin, L. Impacts of the COVID-19 lockdown on energy consumption in a Canadian social housing building. Appl. Energy 2021, 287, 116565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Bhikhoo, N.; Hashemi, A.; Cruickshank, H. Improving Thermal Comfort of Low-Income Housing in Thailand through Passive Design Strategies. Sustainability 2017, 9, 1440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Daly, D.; Harada, T.; Tibbs, M.; Cooper, P.; Waitt, G.; Tartarini, F. Indoor temperatures and energy use in NSW social housing. Energy Build. 2021, 249, 111240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Hernandez, P.; Hernandez, J.; Urra, I.; Grisaleña, D. Life cycle environmental and cost evaluation of heating and hot water supply in social housing nZEBs. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2019, 323, 012162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Neroutsou, T.I.; Croxford, B. Lifecycle costing of low energy housing refurbishment: A case study of a 7 year retrofit in Chester Road, London. Energy Build. 2016, 128, 178–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Romani, Z.; Draoui, A.; Allard, F. Metamodeling and multicriteria analysis for sustainable and passive residential building refurbishment: A case study of French housing stock. In Building Simulation; Tsinghua University Press: Beijing, China, 2021; Volume 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Tabatabaei Sameni, S.M.; Gaterell, M.; Montazami, A.; Ahmed, A. Overheating investigation in UK social housing flats built to the Passivhaus standard. Build. Environ. 2015, 92, 222–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Dalbem, R.; Cunha, E.; Vicente, R.; Figueiredo, A.; Oliveira, R.; Silva, A. Optimisation of a social housing for south of Brazil: From basic performance standard to Passive House concept. Energy 2018, 167, 1278–1296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Koncalovic, D.; Vukasinovic, V.; Zivkovic, D.; Gordic, D.; Dzokic, A.; Neelen, M. Possibilities for affordable, low environmental footprint passive house implementation in Republic of Serbia. Therm. Sci. 2021, 25, 1809–1825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Niskanen, J.; Rohracher, H. Passive houses as affiliative objects: Investment calculations, energy modelling, and collaboration strategies of Swedish housing companies. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2020, 70, 101643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Bienvenido-Huertas, D.; Sánchez-García, D.; Rubio-Bellido, C.; Marín-García, D. Potential of applying adaptive strategies in buildings to reduce the severity of fuel poverty according to the climate zone and climate change: The case of Andalusia. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2021, 73, 103088. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Godoy-Vaca, L.; Vallejo-Coral, E.C.; Martínez-Gómez, J.; Orozco, M.; Villacreses, G. Predicted Medium Vote Thermal Comfort Analysis Applying Energy Simulations with Phase Change Materials for Very Hot-Humid Climates in Social Housing in Ecuador. Sustainability 2021, 13, 1257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Romero-Pérez, C.K.; Rodríguez-Muñoz, N.A.; Alpuche-Cruz, M.G.; Martín-Domínguez, I.R. Preliminary study of the condition of social housing in the city of Durango, México: 9th International Conference on Sustainability and Energy in Buildings, SEB 2017. Energy Procedia 2017, 134, 29–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Vakalis, D.; Patino, E.; Opher, T.; Touchie, M.; Burrows, K.; Maclean, H.; Siegel, J.A. Quantifying thermal comfort and carbon savings from energy-retrofits in social housing. Energy Build. 2021, 241, 110950. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Onyszkiewicz, J.; Sadowski, K. Proposals for the revitalization of prefabricated building facades in terms of the principles of sustainable development and social participation. J. Build. Eng. 2022, 46, 103713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Abu-Hijleh, B.; Manneh, A.; AlNaqbi, A.; AlAwadhi, W.; Kazim, A. Refurbishment of public housing villas in the United Arab Emirates (UAE): Energy and economic impact. Energy Effic. 2017, 10, 249–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Bessa, V.M.T.; Prado, R.T.A. Reduction of carbon dioxide emissions by solar water heating systems and passive technologies in social housing. Energy Policy 2015, 83, 138–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Marta, M.; Belinda, L.-M. Simplified model to determine the energy demand of existing buildings. Case study of social housing in Zaragoza, Spain. Energy Build. 2017, 149, 483–493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Santangelo, A.; Yan, D.; Feng, X.; Tondelli, S. Renovation strategies for the Italian public housing stock: Applying building energy simulation and occupant behaviour modelling to support decision-making process. Energy Build. 2018, 167, 269–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Sansom, G.; Barlow, C.F.; Daniel, L.; Baker, E. Social housing temperature conditions and tenant priorities. Aust. J. Soc. Issues 2023, 58, 624–639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Carpino, C.; Bruno, R.; Arcuri, N. Social housing refurbishment in Mediterranean climate: Cost-optimal analysis towards the n-ZEB target. Energy Build. 2018, 174, 642–656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Hayles, C.S.; Dean, M. Social housing tenants, Climate Change and sustainable living: A study of awareness, behaviours and willingness to adapt. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2015, 17, 35–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Hernandez-Roman, F.; Sheinbaum-Pardo, C.; Calderon-Irazoque, A. “Socially neglected effect” in the implementation of energy technologies to mitigate climate change: Sustainable building program in social housing. Energy Sustain. Dev. 2017, 41, 149–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Jones, R.; Fuertes, A.; Boomsma, C.; Pahl, S. Space heating preferences in UK social housing: A socio-technical household survey combined with building audits. Energy Build. 2016, 127, 382–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Souliotis, M.; Panaras, G.; Fokaides, P.; Papaefthimiou, S.; Kalogirou, S. Solar water heating for social housing: Energy analysis and Life Cycle Assessment. Energy Build. 2018, 169, 157–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Lucero-Álvarez, J.; Rodríguez-Muñoz, N.; Martín-Domínguez, I. The Effects of Roof and Wall Insulation on the Energy Costs of Low Income Housing in Mexico. Sustainability 2016, 8, 590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Forde, J.; Hopfe, C.J.; McLeod, R.S.; Evins, R. Temporal optimization for affordable and resilient Passivhaus dwellings in the social housing sector. Appl. Energy 2020, 261, 114383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Domínguez-Amarillo, S.; Fernández-Agüera, J.; Sendra, J.J.; Roaf, S. The performance of Mediterranean low-income housing in scenarios involving climate change. Energy Build. 2019, 202, 109374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. San Miguel-Bellod, J.; González-Martínez, P.; Sánchez-Ostiz, A. The relationship between poverty and indoor temperatures in winter: Determinants of cold homes in social housing contexts from the 40s–80s in Northern Spain. Energy Build. 2018, 173, 428–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Rodrigues, L.; White, J.; Gillott, M.; Braham, E.; Ishaque, A. Theoretical and experimental thermal performance assessment of an innovative external wall insulation system for social housing retrofit. Energy Build. 2018, 162, 77–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Alayi, R.; Khalilpoor, N.; Heshmati, S.; Najafi, A.; Issakhov, A. Thermal and Environmental Analysis Solar Water Heater System for Residential Buildings. Int. J. Photoenergy 2021, 2021, e6838138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Garcia Kerdan, I.; Morillón, D.; Sousa, G.; Suárez de la Fuente, S.; Silva, R.; Hawkes, A. Thermodynamic and thermal comfort optimisation of a coastal social house considering the influence of the thermal breeze. Build. Environ. 2019, 155, 224–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Moreno, A.C.R.; de Morais, I.S.; de Souza, R.G. Thermal Performance of Social Housing—A Study Based on Brazilian Regulations. Energy Procedia 2017, 111, 111–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Zahiri, S.; Elsharkawy, H. Towards energy-efficient retrofit of council housing in London: Assessing the impact of occupancy and energy-use patterns on building performance. Energy Build. 2018, 174, 672–681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Mavrogianni, A.; Taylor, J.; Davies, M.; Thoua, C.; Kolm-Murray, J. Urban social housing resilience to excess summer heat. Build. Res. Inf. 2015, 43, 316–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Ramsdell, J.E.; Burkett, L.W.; Davis, C.R.; Neri, R.D.; Jacobs, E.; Verster, J.J.P. Value of Energy Efficiency Improvements for Low-Income Housing in Developing Countries. Energy Procedia 2015, 78, 1021–1026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Desvallées, L. Low-carbon retrofits in social housing: Energy efficiency, multidimensional energy poverty, and domestic comfort strategies in southern Europe. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2022, 85, 102413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Van de Moortel, E.; Allacker, K.; Troyer, F.; Stijnen, L.; Schoofs, E. Life cycle environmental impact of refurbishment of social housing. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2019, 323, 012013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Warrier, A.G.; Tadepalli, P.; Palaniappan, S. Low-Cost Housing in India: A Review. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2019, 294, 012092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Boerenfijn, P.; Kazak, J.K.; Schellen, L.; Van Hoof, J. A multi-case study of innovations in energy performance of social housing for older adults in the Netherlands. Energy Build. 2018, 158, 1762–1769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Ma, Z.; Li, C.; Zhang, J. Affordable housing brings about socio-spatial exclusion in Changchun, China: Explanation in various economic motivations of local governments. Habitat Int. 2018, 76, 40–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Woodard, R.; Rossouw, A. An Evaluation of Interventions for Improving Pro-Environmental Waste Behaviour in Social Housing. Sustainability 2021, 13, 7272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Lee, J.; Shepley, M.M. Benefits of solar photovoltaic systems for low-income families in social housing of Korea: Renewable energy applications as solutions to energy poverty. J. Build. Eng. 2020, 28, 101016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Geldermans, B.; Tenpierik, M.; Luscuere, P. Circular and Flexible Infill Concepts: Integration of the Residential User Perspective. Sustainability 2019, 11, 261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Ahmed, K. Designing Sustainable Urban Social Housing in the United Arab Emirates. Sustainability 2017, 9, 1413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Bridi, M.E.; Soliman-Junior, J.; Granja, A.D.; Tzortzopoulos, P.; Gomes, V.; Kowaltowski, D.C.C.K. Living Labs in Social Housing Upgrades: Process, Challenges and Recommendations. Sustainability 2022, 14, 2595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Soliman-Junior, J.; Awwal, S.; Tzortzopoulos, P.; Ayo-Adejuyigbe, M.; Kagioglou, M. Eliciting Requirements in Social Housing Retrofit Projects: 30th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction, Edmonton, AB, Canada, 25–31 July 2022; pp. 468–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Wakely, P. Partnership: A strategic paradigm for the production & management of affordable housing & sustainable urban development. Int. J. Urban Sustain. Dev. 2020, 12, 119–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Nedučin, D.; Škorić, M.; Krklješ, M. Post-socialist Development and Rehabilitation of Large Housing Estates in Central and Eastern Europe: A Review. Teh. Vjesn. 2019, 26, 1853–1860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Salzer, C.; Wallbaum, H.; Lopez, L.; Kouyoumji, J. Sustainability of Social Housing in Asia: A Holistic Multi-Perspective Development Process for Bamboo-Based Construction in the Philippines. Sustainability 2016, 8, 151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Saidu, A.I.; Yeom, C. Success Criteria Evaluation for a Sustainable and Affordable Housing Model: A Case for Improving Household Welfare in Nigeria Cities. Sustainability 2020, 12, 656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Ebrahimigharehbaghi, S.; van der Heijden, H.; Elsinga, M. Sustainable business model of affordable zero energy houses: Upscaling potentials. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 344, 130956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Ibrahim, I.A. Sustainable housing development: Role and significance of satisfaction aspect. City Territ. Archit. 2020, 7, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. McCabe, A.; Pojani, D.; van Groenou, A.B. The application of renewable energy to social housing: A systematic review. Energy Policy 2018, 114, 549–557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Wetzstein, S. The global urban housing affordability crisis. Urban Stud. 2017, 54, 3159–3177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. zu Ermgassen, S.O.S.E.; Drewniok, M.P.; Bull, J.W.; Corlet Walker, C.M.; Mancini, M.; Ryan-Collins, J.; Cabrera Serrenho, A. A home for all within planetary boundaries: Pathways for meeting England’s housing needs without transgressing national climate and biodiversity goals. Ecol. Econ. 2022, 201, 107562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Marta, B.; Giulia, D. Addressing Social Sustainability in Urban Regeneration Processes. An Application of the Social Multi-Criteria Evaluation. Sustainability 2020, 12, 7579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Shi, W.; Chen, J.; Wang, H. Affordable housing policy in China: New developments and new challenges. Habitat Int. 2016, 54, 224–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Ikiz Kaya, D.; Pintossi, N.; Dane, G. An Empirical Analysis of Driving Factors and Policy Enablers of Heritage Adaptive Reuse within the Circular Economy Framework. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Acampa, G.; Diana, L.; Marino, G.; Marmo, R. Assessing the Transformability of Public Housing through BIM. Sustainability 2021, 13, 5431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Morris, A.; Beer, A.; Martin, J.; Horne, S.; Davis, C.; Budge, T.; Paris, C. Australian local governments and affordable housing: Challenges and possibilities. Econ. Labour Relat. Rev. 2020, 31, 14–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Rolim, C.; Gomes, R. Citizen Engagement in Energy Efficiency Retrofit of Public Housing Buildings: A Lisbon Case Study. In Sustainability in Energy and Buildings: Proceedings of SEB 2019; Springer: Singapore, 2020; Volume 163, pp. 421–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Karatasou, S.; Laskari, M.; Santamouris, M. Determinants of high electricity use and high energy consumption for space and water heating in European social housing: Socio-demographic and building characteristics. Energy Build. 2018, 170, 107–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Cubillos-González, R.-A.; Tiberio Cardoso, G. Clean Technology Transfer and Innovation in Social Housing Production in Brazil and Colombia. A Framework from a Systematic Review. Sustainability 2020, 12, 1335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Yan, J.; Haffner, M.; Elsinga, M. Embracing market and civic actor participation in public rental housing governance: New insights about power distribution. Hous. Stud. 2022, 37, 435–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Gan, X.; Zuo, J.; Wen, T.; She, Y. Exploring the Adequacy of Massive Constructed Public Housing in China. Sustainability 2019, 11, 1949. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Chegut, A.; Eichholtz, P.; Holtermans, R. Energy efficiency and economic value in affordable housing. Energy Policy 2016, 97, 39–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Ezennia, I.S.; Hoskara, S.O. Exploring the Severity of Factors Influencing Sustainable Affordable Housing Choice: Evidence from Abuja, Nigeria. Sustainability 2019, 11, 5792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Morgenstern, P.; Lowe, R.; Chiu, L.F. Heat metering: Socio-technical challenges in district-heated social housing. Build. Res. Inf. 2015, 43, 197–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Alhajri, M. Housing challenges and programs to enhance access to affordable housing in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Ain Shams Eng. J. 2022, 13, 101798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Milovanović, A.; Nikezić, A.; Ristić Trajković, J. Introducing Matrix for the Reprogramming of Mass Housing Neighbourhoods (MHN) Based on EU Design Taxonomy: The Observatory Case of Serbia. Buildings 2023, 13, 723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Delgado, J.; Matos, A.M.; Guimarães, A.S. Linking Indoor Thermal Comfort with Climate, Energy, Housing, and Living Conditions: Portuguese Case in European Context. Energies 2022, 15, 6028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Aghimien, D.; Aigbavboa, C.; Aghimien, L.; Thwala, W.D.; Ndlovu, L. Making a case for 3D printing for housing delivery in South Africa. Int. J. Hous. Mark. Anal. 2020, 13, 565–581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Jonker-Hoffrén, P. Policy tensions in demolition: Dutch social housing and circularity. Build. Cities 2023, 4, 405–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Warren-Myers, G.; McRae, E.; Raynor, K.; Palm, M. Modelling the Effects of Affordable Housing “Sticks” and “Carrots” for Developer-Delivered Projects. September 2019. Available online: http://hdl.handle.net/11343/233309 (accessed on 7 November 2023).
  140. Gibb, K.; McNulty, D.; McLaughlin, T. Risk and resilience in the Scottish social housing sector: ‘We’re all risk managers’. Int. J. Hous. Policy 2016, 16, 435–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Arvizu Piña, V.; Burgos, A. Promoting sustainability in Mexico’s building sector via environmental product declarations. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 2017, 22, 1744–1759. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Cauvain, J.; Karvonen, A. Social housing providers as unlikely low-carbon innovators. Energy Build. 2018, 177, 394–401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Mullins, D.; Milligan, V.; Nieboer, N. State directed hybridity?—The relationship between non-profit housing organizations and the state in three national contexts. Hous. Stud. 2018, 33, 565–588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Cumo, F.; Giustini, F.; Pennacchia, E.; Romeo, C. Support Decision Tool for Sustainable Energy Requalification the Existing Residential Building Stock. The Case Study of Trevignano Romano. Energies 2020, 14, 74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Zhou, J.; Ronald, R. The resurgence of public housing provision in China: The Chongqing programme. Hous. Stud. 2017, 32, 428–448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Lambrechts, W.; Mitchell, A.; Lemon, M.; Mazhar, M.U.; Ooms, W.; Heerde, R. The Transition of Dutch Social Housing Corporations to Sustainable Business Models for New Buildings and Retrofits. Energies 2021, 14, 631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Van Stijn, A.; Wouterszoon Jansen, B.; Gruis, V.; Van Bortel, G.A. Towards implementation of circular building components: A longitudinal study on the stakeholder choices in the development of 8 circular building components. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 420, 138287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Paidakaki, A.; Lang, R. Uncovering Social Sustainability in Housing Systems through the Lens of Institutional Capital: A Study of Two Housing Alliances in Vienna, Austria. Sustainability 2021, 13, 9726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Dauda, J.A.; Ajayi, S.O. Understanding the impediments to sustainable structural retrofit of existing buildings in the UK. J. Build. Eng. 2022, 60, 105168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Muniz, B. Censo 2022: Brasil Tem 11 Milhões de Domicílios Vagos. Agência Pública, 29 June 2023. Available online: https://apublica.org/2023/06/censo-2022-brasil-tem-11-milhoes-de-casas-e-apartamentos-vagos/ (accessed on 14 November 2023).
  151. Fundação João Pinheiro. Deficit Habitacional No Brasil—2016–2019/Fundação João Pinheiro; FJP: Belo Horizonte, Brazil, 2021. Available online: https://fjp.mg.gov.br/deficit-habitacional-no-brasil/ (accessed on 6 November 2023).
  152. Interaction Design Foundation—IxDF. What Is User Centered Design? 2016. Available online: https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/topics/user-centered-design (accessed on 6 November 2023).
  153. United Way NCA. Vacant Homes vs. Homelessness in the U.S. United Way NCA, 28 March 2023. Available online: https://unitedwaynca.org/blog/vacant-homes-vs-homelessness-by-city/ (accessed on 14 November 2023).
  154. IBGE IBGE|Biblioteca|Detalhes|Censo Demográfico 2022: População e Domicílios: Primeiros Resultados/IBGE, Coordenação Técnica do Censo Demográfico. Available online: https://biblioteca.ibge.gov.br/index.php/biblioteca-catalogo?view=detalhes&id=2102011 (accessed on 14 November 2023).
  155. Liang, Z.; Li, Z.; Ma, Z. Changing Patterns of the Floating Population in China, 2000–2010. Popul. Dev. Rev. 2014, 40, 695–716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Wu, S.; Fan, P.; Chen, J. Incorporating Culture Into Sustainable Development: A Cultural Sustainability Index Framework for Green Buildings. Sustain. Dev. 2015, 24, 64–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Moskos, M.; Isherwood, L.; Dockery, M.; Baker, E.; Pham, A. ‘What works’ to sustain Indigenous tenancies in Australia. AHURI Final Rep. 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Processing of an SLR in the scientific literature (review date: 3 October 2023).
Figure 1. Processing of an SLR in the scientific literature (review date: 3 October 2023).
Asi 07 00021 g001
Figure 2. Print from part of Results Matrix 1.
Figure 2. Print from part of Results Matrix 1.
Asi 07 00021 g002
Figure 3. Print from part of Results Matrix 2.
Figure 3. Print from part of Results Matrix 2.
Asi 07 00021 g003
Figure 4. Theme Tree Map.
Figure 4. Theme Tree Map.
Asi 07 00021 g004
Figure 5. Distribution of publications around the world.
Figure 5. Distribution of publications around the world.
Asi 07 00021 g005
Figure 6. Countries’ production.
Figure 6. Countries’ production.
Asi 07 00021 g006
Figure 7. Colour Scale by Theme/Country.
Figure 7. Colour Scale by Theme/Country.
Asi 07 00021 g007
Figure 8. Most-studied themes in China in this SLR.
Figure 8. Most-studied themes in China in this SLR.
Asi 07 00021 g008
Figure 9. Latin America and Caribbean preferential themes in this SLR.
Figure 9. Latin America and Caribbean preferential themes in this SLR.
Asi 07 00021 g009
Table 1. Systematic Literature Review protocol for this study.
Table 1. Systematic Literature Review protocol for this study.
ProtocolStages Protocol StepsResearch Aspects
1. PlanningBackground to reviewProblem: Solve the social housing crisis based on CE principles.
Rationale: Circular Economy (CE) principles are available to help solve the social housing challenge.
Initial RQ: How can the Circular Economy contribute to resolving social housing challenges?
Objectives StatementPrimary objective:
1—Exploring the most-used terms related to SH and CE on an academic basis.
2—Selecting, through an SLR, documents that deal with SH and relate to CE
principles.
3—Listing the study themes covered in SH studies related to CE.
4—Listing which Circular Economy principles have been addressed in studies on social housing.
5—Listing the main proposals made in the documents.
6—Identifying potential future gaps and opportunities to fuel the process towards a CE in the SH sector.
Sub-questions—Question problems:
QP1. Which themes related to the Circular Economy have been studied in social housing research?
QP2. Which Circular Economy principles have been addressed in studies on social housing?
QP3. How can the construction sector contribute to a Circular Economy model addressing social housing challenges?
QP4. What gaps remain in the relationship between social housing and the Circular Economy?
2. ProcessingCriteria for selecting studiesContext: social housing, social housing policies, circular economy, life cycle assessment, reused materials, recycled materials, refurbishment, material passports, designing for assembly, designing for disassembly, cradle-to-cradle, built environment, energy efficiency, sustainable urban development.
Interventions, mechanisms, and outcomes: strategies, theories, practical examples, concepts, principles, guidelines, recommendations.
Types of studies: both qualitative and quantitative.
Search strategy for identification of studiesDatabases: Scopus, Web of Science, and ScienceDirect.
Timeframe: 2015 to the present time of the study.
Keywords: social housing, public housing, housing estate, affordable house,
circular economy, circular material, cradle-to-cradle.
Language: English.
Article type: indexed journal papers, conference proceedings, books, book chapters.
Grey literature: included.
3. AnalysisEligibilityInclusion/exclusion criteria:
     -
Journal papers, conferences, proceedings, book chapters, editorials, abstracts.
     -
Open access.
     -
Social housing, public housing, housing estate, affordable housing,
     -
Circular Economy, life cycle assessment/costing (LCA/LCC), circular material,
     -
cradle-to-cradle.
     -
2015 to the time of the study.
     -
Three reviewers screen the articles.
Quality appraisalThe paper is accepted only if approved by at least two of the three reviewers who assess its quality.
4. Extraction and ReportingData collectionThe eligible articles are screened, analysed, and sorted by themes, environmental aims, proposals, and countries. Additional sources and studies are included.
Results synthesisType of synthesis: interpreted through a descriptive and exploratory analysis of the
bibliographical research content.
Table 2. Identified Proposals.
Table 2. Identified Proposals.
ProposalDescriptionSources
1. Energy-efficiency measuresThe most-cited propositions are about energy-efficiency measures: refurbishment of thermal and comfort performances; paying attention to overheating risk; thermal insulation alternatives; indoor environmental quality; prioritising passive design solutions; use of building orientation design; optimised facade effects; using of ceiling fans, shading, natural ventilation, and wall insulation; efficient HVAC systems; and efficient alternative hot water systems. [25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76,77,78,79,80,81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88,89,90,91,92,93,94,95,96,97,98,99,100,101,102,103,104]
2. Users’ orientationCitizens’ and users’ orientation about the advantages of investing in energy and thermal retrofit is essential. In order to develop citizen engagement, it is necessary to foster a participative design discussion with users about cost/benefits. [8,77,84,104,105,106,107,108,109,110,111,112,113,114,115,116,117,118,119]
3. Social housing policiesDeveloping new or revised energy and social housing policies and technical regulations should count on the mandatory participation of citizens, non-profit housing organisations, and social housing providers from the public and private markets. [31,51,87,93,107,112,114,120,121,122,123,124,125,126,127,128,129,130,131,132,133,134,135,136,137,138,139,140,141,142,143,144,145,146,147,148,149]
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.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Gomide, F.P.d.B.; Bragança, L.; Casagrande Junior, E.F. How Can the Circular Economy Contribute to Resolving Social Housing Challenges? Appl. Syst. Innov. 2024, 7, 21. https://doi.org/10.3390/asi7020021

AMA Style

Gomide FPdB, Bragança L, Casagrande Junior EF. How Can the Circular Economy Contribute to Resolving Social Housing Challenges? Applied System Innovation. 2024; 7(2):21. https://doi.org/10.3390/asi7020021

Chicago/Turabian Style

Gomide, Fernanda Paes de Barros, Luís Bragança, and Eloy Fassi Casagrande Junior. 2024. "How Can the Circular Economy Contribute to Resolving Social Housing Challenges?" Applied System Innovation 7, no. 2: 21. https://doi.org/10.3390/asi7020021

APA Style

Gomide, F. P. d. B., Bragança, L., & Casagrande Junior, E. F. (2024). How Can the Circular Economy Contribute to Resolving Social Housing Challenges? Applied System Innovation, 7(2), 21. https://doi.org/10.3390/asi7020021

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop