This multi-site experimental study investigated the Hue-Heat Hypothesis (HHH), which posits that light hues can influence human thermal perception, as well as broader cross-modal interactions between visual and thermal domains. Across 464 experimental sessions in eight test rooms around the world, participants were exposed to varied thermal conditions (∼20 °C, ∼24 °C, ∼26 °C, and ∼28 °C) and typical white-light Correlated Color Temperatures (CCT, warm light: ∼3000 K; neutral: ∼4000 K; cool light: ∼6000 K) from LED sources (horizontal illuminance: ∼500 lx). The study assessed thermal, visual, and overall perceptions. Results revealed that thermal sensation and preference were predominantly influenced by thermal conditions, gender, and the laboratory setting, indicating that no statistically significant effects were found in support of the HHH. Similarly, visual perceptions were influenced by lighting conditions but not by the thermal environment. For instance, cool light was perceived as brighter than warm light, leading participants to prefer brighter light under warm light hues. Ultimately, this research revealed the significant challenges of interlaboratory experiments in this field, as local climate and test-room characteristics complicate both the conduct and the standardization of data analysis. Our findings highlight both the limited role of white-light CCT in shaping thermal sensations and the methodological challenges of multi-site comfort research, underscoring the need for careful data harmonization and context-aware analyses in future international collaborations.

Assessing risk and resilience in the built environment requires a comprehensive understanding of the dynamic interactions between physical spaces and their users across multiple scales. The study aims to develop a framework to support such assessments by identifying and structuring quantitative Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for evaluating risk and resilience in the built environment. The study combines expert engagement and desk review to identify key factors influencing risk and resilience. It considers a wide range of hazards—both climate-related (e.g., floods, droughts, heat waves) and non-climate-related (e.g., earthquakes)—and examines their impacts on people, buildings, infrastructure, cultural heritage, and urban and territorial systems. Grounded in international guidelines and validated by experts, the proposed set of KPIs enables systematic assessment across scales, user groups, and systems. The KPIs cover risk components such as hazard, exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity, as well as resilience qualities including robustness, rapidity, resourcefulness, and redundancy. Furthermore, the framework incorporates multiple resilience dimensions—environmental, economic, physical, digital, organisational, and human health and well-being—addressing critical gaps in existing assessment tools. By measuring both vulnerability characteristics and resilience qualities of built environment assets, the framework provides actionable insights to inform policies, planning strategies, and project design. This study contributes to advancing integrated and evidence-based approaches for disaster risk reduction and climate resilience, offering a tool to support decision-makers, designers, and practitioners in evaluating current conditions and shaping future development or regeneration pathways.

Earth is one of the oldest and till now intensively used natural building material. Around 30% of the world population still lives or works in buildings constructed out of earth. Most of them dwell in simple huts of rural communities or traditionally hand-crafted buildings. However, a growing number of people looking for healthy, environmentally friendly buildings in so called developed societies experience benefits of earthen construction materials. Due to the hygrothermal potential of clay, these benefits of earthen constructions include evaporative cooling during cooling periods and stable relative humidity levels indoors during the heating season. In addition, earthen building materials may contribute to the urgently needed circular economy, as earthen constructions like earth blocks or earth dry boards are reusable and earth plasters and mortars are replasticisable through the addition of water, as long as no chemical binder is added. Research gaps regarding physical properties, missing standardisation concerning building law and modern construction methods, and a limited number of manufacturers are hindering a wide application of earthen construction worldwide. Meanwhile, new digital production techniques evolve, which may elicit the potential of earth as future building material. Therefore, this Ten Questions article presents the state-of-the art and research gaps related to earth as building material in light of the potential of new digital production techniques like robotic fabrication or additive manufacturing. Such discussion includes new opportunities to combine the natural performance of the material with future-oriented construction systems and a new growing circular economy.

Literature sets personal control over indoor environmental conditions in relation to the gap between predicted and actual energy use, the gap between predicted and observed user satisfaction, and health aspects. A focus on building energy performance often leads to the proposal of more automated and less occupant control of the indoor environment. However, a high degree of personal control is desirable because research shows that a low degree (or no) personal control highly correlates with indoor environmental dissatisfaction and sick building syndrome symptoms. These two tendencies seem contradictory and optimisation almost impossible. Based on current efficiency classes describing the effect of room automation systems on building energy use during operation, fundamental thoughts related to thermophysiology and control, recent laboratory experiments, important lessons learnt from post-occupancy studies, and documented conceptual frameworks on the level of control perceived, we discuss the ambivalence of personal control and how much personal control is adequate. Often-proposed solutions ranging from fully automated controls, over manual controls to dummy controls are discussed according to their effect on a) building energy use during operation and b) occupants perceived control. The discussion points to the importance of adequate personal control. In order to meet the goals for nearly zero energy buildings and for a human-centric design, there is the need to establish design procedures for adequate personal control as part of the design process.