Indoor environmental quality assessment in the built environment: A critical synthesis of methodologies and energy integration practices
- 1Bert S. Turner Department of Construction Management, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA; Department of Environmental Sciences, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA; Corresponding author.
- 2Bert S. Turner Department of Construction Management, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA
- 3Department of Environmental Sciences, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA
Abstract
This study systematically reviews 99 research articles published over the past seven years, sourced from four reputable databases, to examine how indoor environmental quality (IEQ) is assessed and how energy data are integrated across various building types and climate zones. Five key IEQ assessment approaches emerged: subjective, objective, dual-method, weighting scheme, and computational model-aided methods. Although 41.4 % of the articles included energy usage data, variations in monitoring duration, normalization techniques, and statistical rigor limited the ability to compare findings across studies. Tools like machine learning and IoT-enabled BIM show strong potential for real-time optimization of IEQ and energy performance, yet they remain underused. Thermal and lighting conditions were identified as the most energy-intensive IEQ dimensions, though results often varied due to climatic and methodological differences. In several cases, energy-saving interventions inadvertently compromised indoor air quality and thermal comfort, highlighting the need for integrated, precautionary strategies. Surprisingly, only 7.1 % of articles involved post-assessment stakeholder engagement or follow-up interventions, exposing a gap between research and real-world impact. This study highlights the importance of critically evaluating performance metrics for contextual relevance and methodological soundness. To advance both occupant well-being and building energy performance globally, the field must embrace standardized assessment models, climate-responsive design, and well-rounded post-intervention evaluations.
Related
- Incomplete coverage of the state of nature across biodiversity credit methodologies: an assessment using the State of Nature metrics framework
- Integrating green building technology and renewable energy for a carbon-neutral built environment: Exploring the mechanisms of energy efficiency, AI technology, and environmental policy stringency
- Microbial Inoculant‐Driven Degradation of Microplastics Associated With Garbage Environment and Assessment of Degradation Product Toxicity
- The occurrence of pharmacologically active dyes in the aquatic environment as a result of water and wastewater contamination—an underestimated environmental problem
- What constitutes fine-scale geodiversity? Taxonomic geodiversity mapping across environmental gradients in a sub-Arctic mountain environment
BibTeX
@article{awolesi2026indoor,
title = {{Indoor environmental quality assessment in the built environment: A critical synthesis of methodologies and energy integration practices}},
author = {Oluwafemi Awolesi and Fatemeh Ghafari and Margaret Reams},
journal = {Energy and Built Environment},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.1016/j.enbenv.2025.09.002},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbenv.2025.09.002},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Indoor environmental quality assessment in the built environment: A critical synthesis of methodologies and energy integration practices
AU - Oluwafemi Awolesi
AU - Fatemeh Ghafari
AU - Margaret Reams
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/30
JO - Energy and Built Environment
DO - 10.1016/j.enbenv.2025.09.002
UR - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbenv.2025.09.002
AB - This study systematically reviews 99 research articles published over the past seven years, sourced from four reputable databases, to examine how indoor environmental quality (IEQ) is assessed and how energy data are integrated across various building types and climate zones. Five key IEQ assessment approaches emerged: subjective, objective, dual-method, weighting scheme, and computational model-aided methods. Although 41.4 % of the articles included energy usage data, variations in monitoring duration, normalization techniques, and statistical rigor limited the ability to compare findings across studies. Tools like machine learning and IoT-enabled BIM show strong potential for real-time optimization of IEQ and energy performance, yet they remain underused. Thermal and lighting conditions were identified as the most energy-intensive IEQ dimensions, though results often varied due to climatic and methodological differences. In several cases, energy-saving interventions inadvertently compromised indoor air quality and thermal comfort, highlighting the need for integrated, precautionary strategies. Surprisingly, only 7.1 % of articles involved post-assessment stakeholder engagement or follow-up interventions, exposing a gap between research and real-world impact. This study highlights the importance of critically evaluating performance metrics for contextual relevance and methodological soundness. To advance both occupant well-being and building energy performance globally, the field must embrace standardized assessment models, climate-responsive design, and well-rounded post-intervention evaluations.
SN - 2666-1233
ER -