Post-Pandemic Public Building Architecture Design Adaptations
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.71222/t2qrhf66Keywords:
post-pandemic architecture, public buildings, indoor environmental quality, ventilation systems, building adaptation, occupant well-beingAbstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has fundamentally transformed architectural design principles and building practices for public facilities, necessitating comprehensive adaptations that prioritize health, safety, and environmental quality while maintaining functional efficiency and user satisfaction. This comprehensive study examines the systematic evolution of architectural design strategies implemented in public buildings following the pandemic, analyzing the integration of enhanced ventilation systems, spatial reconfiguration approaches, and innovative material selections that address contemporary health concerns. Through evaluation of global architectural adaptations, this research reveals significant shifts in design philosophy that emphasize occupant well-being, indoor environmental quality optimization, and flexibility for future health emergencies. Post-pandemic architectural design demonstrates substantial improvements in air quality management, spatial utilization efficiency, and occupant comfort levels, with ventilation effectiveness increasing by 40-60% and user satisfaction scores improving by 25-35% in renovated public facilities. The study investigates various adaptation strategies including touchless technology integration, modular space design, and sustainable material implementation that collectively enhance building resilience and occupant health protection. Furthermore, the research examines implementation challenges including cost considerations, regulatory compliance requirements, and technical complexity that influence adoption rates across different facility types. The findings demonstrate that organizations implementing comprehensive post-pandemic design adaptations achieve significant improvements in occupant health outcomes, operational efficiency, and long-term building performance while maintaining architectural aesthetics and functional requirements. This analysis provides evidence-based guidance for architects, facility managers, and public administrators considering building adaptations and offers practical recommendations for optimizing public facility design in the post-pandemic era.
References
1. Y. Liu, "Post-pandemic Architectural Design: A Review of Global Adaptations in Public Buildings," Int. J. Eng. Adv., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 91–100, 2025, doi: 10.71222/1cj1j328.
2. M. Elsayed, S. Pelsmakers, L. Pistore, R. Castaño-Rosa, and P. Romagnoni, "Post-occupancy evaluation in residential buildings: A systematic literature review of current practices in the EU," Build. Environ., vol. 236, p. 110307, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2023.110307.
3. Y. Al horr, M. Arif, M. Katafygiotou, A. Mazroei, A. Kaushik, and E. Elsarrag, "Impact of indoor environmental quality on occupant well-being and comfort: A review of the literature," Int. J. Sustain. Built Environ., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 1–11, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.ijsbe.2016.03.006.
4. A. Almusaed, A. Almssad, R. Z. Homod, and I. Yitmen, "Environmental Profile on Building Material Passports for Hot Climates," Sustainability, vol. 12, no. 9, p. 3720, 2020, doi: 10.3390/su12093720.
5. S. Yang, "The Impact of Continuous Integration and Continuous Delivery on Software Development Efficiency," J. Comput. Signal Syst. Res., vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 59–68, 2025, doi: 10.71222/pzvfqm21.
6. K. Azuma, N. Kagi, U. Yanagi, and H. Osawa, "Effects of low-level inhalation exposure to carbon dioxide in indoor environments: A short review on human health and psychomotor performance," Environ. Int., vol. 121, no. 1, pp. 51–56, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2018.08.059.
7. B. Wang, "Smart Manufacturing and Intelligent Manufacturing: A Comparative Review," Engineering, vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 738–757, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.eng.2020.07.017.
8. L. Yang, "The Evolution of Ballet Pedagogy: A Study of Traditional and Contemporary Approaches," J. Lit. Arts Res., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 1–10, 2025, doi: 10.71222/2nw5qw82.
9. H. Byrd and E. Rasheed, "The Productivity Paradox in Green Buildings," Sustainability, vol. 8, no. 4, p. 347, 2016, doi: 10.3390/su8040347.
10. A. Chegut, P. Eichholtz, and N. Kok, "Supply, Demand and the Value of Green Buildings," Urban Stud., vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 22–43, 2014, doi: 10.1177/0042098013484526.
11. L. Yun, "Analyzing Credit Risk Management in the Digital Age: Challenges and Solutions," Econ. Manag. Innov., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 81–92, 2025, doi: 10.71222/ps8sw070.
12. J. K. Day and D. E. Gunderson, "Understanding high performance buildings: The link between occupant knowledge of passive design systems, corresponding behaviors, occupant comfort and environmental satisfaction," Build. Environ., vol. 84, pp. 114–124, 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2014.11.003.
13. Z. Gou, D. Prasad, and S. Siu-Yu Lau, "Are green buildings more satisfactory and comfortable?," Habitat Int., vol. 39, pp. 156–161, 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.habitatint.2012.12.007.
14. B. Wu, "Market Research and Product Planning in E- commerce Projects: A Systematic Analysis of Strategies and Methods," Acad. J. Bus. Manag., vol. 7, pp. 45–53, 2025, doi: 10.25236/AJBM.2025.070307.
15. R. F. da Silva and G. F. M. de Souza, "Modeling a maintenance management framework for asset management based on ISO 55000 series guidelines," J. Qual. Maint. Eng., vol. ahead-of-print, no. ahead-of-print, 2021, doi: 10.1108/jqme-08-2020-0082.
16. F. Felgueiras, Z. Mourão, A. Moreira, and M. F. Gabriel, "Indoor environmental quality in offices and risk of health and productivity complaints at work: a literature review," J. Hazard. Mater. Adv., vol. 10, pp. 100314–100314, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.hazadv.2023.100314.
17. Y. S. Lee and D. A. Guerin, "Indoor Environmental Quality Related to Occupant Satisfaction and Performance in LEED-certified Buildings," Indoor Built Environ., vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 293–300, 2009, doi: 10.1177/1420326x09105455.
18. P. Li, T. M. Froese, and G. Brager, "Post-occupancy evaluation: State-of-the-art analysis and state-of-the-practice review," Build. Environ., vol. 133, pp. 187–202, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.02.024.
19. C. Spandagos, E. Baark, T. L. Ng, and M. Yarime, "Social influence and economic intervention policies to save energy at home: Critical questions for the new decade and evidence from air-condition use," Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 143, p. 110915, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2021.110915.
20. Md. S. Islam, Md. A. I. Rayhan, and T. H. Mojumder, "Behavioral factors underlying energy consumption pattern: A cross-sectional study on industrial sector of Bangladesh," Heliyon, vol. 8, no. 11, p. e11523, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11523.
21. D. Huckebrink and V. Bertsch, "Integrating Behavioural Aspects in Energy System Modelling—A Review," Energies, vol. 14, no. 15, p. 4579, 2021, doi: 10.3390/en14154579.
22. P. MacNaughton, J. Pegues, U. Satish, S. Santanam, J. Spengler, and J. Allen, "Economic, Environmental and Health Implications of Enhanced Ventilation in Office Buildings," Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, vol. 12, no. 11, pp. 14709–14722, 2015, doi: 10.3390/ijerph121114709.
23. L. Pérez-Lombard, J. Ortiz, and C. Pout, "A review on buildings energy consumption information," Energy Build., vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 394–398, 2008, doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2007.03.007.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Qiang Ruan (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
