SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Türk Doğa ve Fen Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 15 Sayı: 2

Daylighting as a Sustainable Design Parameter: User-Based Evaluation of a Public Building

Sürdürülebilir Tasarım Parametresi Olarak Günışığı: Kamusal Bir Yapının Kullanıcı Temelli Değerlendirilmesi

Hüseyin Çelik(ALANYA HAMDULLAH EMİN PAŞA ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0009-0004-6360-0238
Elif Gizem Yetkin(ALANYA ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-8775-8313
Pages
215–228
Publication Date
2026-07-01
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The findings indicate that daylight levels are directly associated with user comfort and are significantly influenced by architectural design decisions.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Increasing energy consumption and the environmental impacts of the building sector necessitate a re-evaluation of daylighting within the framework of sustainable architecture.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This study aims to evaluate the daylight performance of a public building from a sustainability perspective through user experience.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The findings indicate that daylight levels are directly associated with user comfort and are significantly influenced by architectural design decisions.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:2025 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Doğal Aydınlatma · Sürdürülebilir Mimarlık · Kullanıcı Deneyimi

Abstract

Increasing energy consumption and the environmental impacts of the building sector necessitate a re-evaluation of daylighting within the framework of sustainable architecture. This study aims to evaluate the daylight performance of a public building from a sustainability perspective through user experience. The New Service Building of Alanya Municipality, which became operational in 2025, was selected as the case study, and data were collected from 147 active users of the building. A structured questionnaire developed based on the TS EN 17037+A1:2021 “Daylight in Buildings” standard was used as the primary data collection tool. The data collection process was carried out through user-based surveys, and the collected data were analyzed using SPSS 26.0 through reliability, normality, descriptive, and correlation analyses. The findings indicate that daylight levels are directly associated with user comfort and are significantly influenced by architectural design decisions. In addition, visual connection with the outdoor environment contributes positively to user satisfaction, while glare negatively affects perceived comfort. The results also reveal that daylight should not only be considered in terms of energy efficiency but also as a critical parameter influencing visual comfort, psychological well-being, and overall user satisfaction. In conclusion, the study highlights the importance of integrating user experience into daylight performance evaluation and provides empirical evidence contributing to both sustainable architectural design practices and the existing body of knowledge.

Özet

Artan enerji tüketimi ve yapı sektörünün çevresel etkileri, doğal aydınlatmanın sürdürülebilir mimarlık bağlamında yeniden değerlendirilmesini gerekli kılmaktadır. Bu çalışma, bir kamusal yapının günışığı performansını kullanıcı deneyimi üzerinden değerlendirmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Araştırma kapsamında 2025 yılında hizmete açılan Alanya Belediyesi Yeni Hizmet Binası örneklem olarak seçilmiş ve yapıyı aktif kullanan 147 kişiden veri toplanmıştır. Veriler, TS EN 17037+A1:2021 “Binalarda Günışığı” standardına dayalı olarak geliştirilen yapılandırılmış anket aracılığıyla elde edilmiş ve SPSS 26.0 programı kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. Çalışmada betimleyici istatistikler ve korelasyon analizleri uygulanmıştır. Bulgular, günışığı düzeyi ile kullanıcı memnuniyeti arasında anlamlı ve pozitif bir ilişki bulunduğunu, buna karşılık kamaşmanın memnuniyeti olumsuz etkilediğini göstermektedir. Ayrıca dış mekân ile görsel bağlantının kullanıcı konforu üzerinde önemli bir etkisi olduğu belirlenmiştir. Sonuç olarak günışığının yalnızca enerji verimliliği açısından değil, aynı zamanda görsel konfor, psikolojik iyilik hali ve kullanıcı memnuniyeti açısından da temel bir sürdürülebilir tasarım parametresi olduğu ortaya konulmuştur.

🔖

Cite This Article

Çelik, H., Yetkin, E. G. (2026). Daylighting as a Sustainable Design Parameter: User-Based Evaluation of a Public Building. Türk Doğa ve Fen Dergisi, Cilt: 15 Sayı: 2, 215–228. https://doi.org/10.46810/tdfd.1930954

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (49)

  1. International Energy Agency (IEA). Energy Efficiency 2023. Paris: IEA Publications, 2023.
  2. Reinhart C. F., & Weissman D. A. “The Daylighting Dashboard – A Simulation-Based Design Analysis for Daylit Spaces.” Building and Environment, 46(2), 386–396, 2012.
  3. Heschong L. “Daylighting and Human Performance.” ASHRAE Journal, 44(6), 65–67, 2002.
  4. Boyce P. R. Human Factors in Lighting. 3rd ed., Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2014.
  5. Veitch J. A., & Galasiu A. D. “The Physiological and Psychological Effects of Windows, Daylight, and View at Home.” National Research Council Canada, 2012.
  6. Edwards L., & Torcellini P. “A Literature Review of the Effects of Natural Light on Building Occupants.” National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), 2002.
  7. Boubekri M. Daylighting, Architecture and Health. Oxford: Architectural Press, 2008.
  8. Allen J. G., MacNaughton P., Satish U., Santanam S., Vallarino, J., & Spengler J. D. “Associations of Cognitive Function Scores with Carbon Dioxide, Ventilation, and Volatile Organic Compound Exposures in Office Workers.” Environmental Health Perspectives, 124(6), 805–812, 2016.
  9. Frontczak M., & Wargocki P. “Literature Survey on How Different Factors Influence Human Comfort in Indoor Environments.” Building and Environment, 46(4), 922–937, 2011.
  10. Kim J., & de Dear R. “Workspace Satisfaction: The Privacy-Communication Trade-Off in Open-Plan Offices.” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 36, 18–26, 2013.
  11. European Committee for Standardization. EN 17037 Daylight in Buildings. Brussels: CEN, 2018.
  12. Bellia L., Fragliasso F., & Stefanizzi E. “Daylighting Offices: A First Step Toward the Evaluation of Daylight Quality According to EN 17037.” Sustainability, 13(4), 2021.
  13. Mangkuto R. A., Wang X., Aries M. B. C., & van Loenen E. J. “User Preferences and Daylighting in Office Buildings: A Review.” Building and Environment, 158, 2019.
  14. Altomonte S., Schiavon S., Kent M. G., & Brager G. “Indoor Environmental Quality and Occupant Satisfaction in Green-Certified Buildings.” Building Research & Information, 47(3), 255–274, 2019.
  15. Candido C., Marzban S., Haddad S., Mackey M., & Nethery A. “Designing Activity-Based Workplaces: Satisfaction, Productivity and Physical Activity.” Building Research & Information, 50(2), 2022.
  16. Boubekri M., Cheung I. N., Reid K. J., Wang C. H., & Zee P. C. “Impact of Windows and Daylight Exposure on Overall Health and Sleep Quality of Office Workers.” Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine, 10(6), 603–611, 2014.
  17. Figueiro M. G., Rea M. S., & Boyce P. “Daylight and Productivity – A Possible Link to Circadian Regulation.” Lighting Research & Technology, 49(5), 2017.
  18. Durak Aylin, and Ahmet Çifci. "Energy-Efficient Lighting Design: An Investigation of Optimal Daylight Use in Different Window Sizes." Türk Doğa ve Fen Dergisi 12, no. 4 (2023): 114-122.
  19. Aksoy Muharrem Hilmi, İsmail Çiylez and Murat İspir. "Effect of azimuth angle on the performance of a small-scale on-grid PV system." Türk Doğa ve Fen Dergisi 11, no. 4 (2022): 42-49.
  20. Bluyssen P. M. The Indoor Environment Handbook: How to Make Buildings Healthy and Comfortable. London: Earthscan, 2010.
  21. Lechner N. Heating, Cooling, Lighting: Sustainable Design Methods for Architects. 5th ed., Hoboken: Wiley, 2021.
  22. Yıldırım K., & Arslan G. “Evaluation of Daylighting Performance in Public Buildings in Türkiye.” Journal of Architectural Sciences and Applications, 7(2), 2022.
  23. Olesen BW. The philosophy behind EN 15251: Indoor environmental criteria for design and calculation of energy performance of buildings. Energy Build. 2007;39(7):740-9.
  24. Lechner N. Heating, cooling, lighting: Sustainable design methods for architects. 4th ed. Hoboken: Wiley; 2015.
  25. Edwards L, Torcellini P. A literature review of the effects of natural light on building occupants. Golden: National Renewable Energy Laboratory; 2002.
  26. Boubekri M, Cheung IN, Reid KJ, Wang C, Zee PC. Impact of windows and daylight exposure on overall health and sleep quality of office workers. J Clin Sleep Med. 2014;10(6):603-11.
  27. Allen JG, MacNaughton P, Satish U, Santanam S, Vallarino J, Spengler JD. Associations of cognitive function scores with carbon dioxide, ventilation, and volatile organic compound exposures in office workers. Environ Health Perspect. 2016;124(6):805-12.
  28. United Nations Environment Programme. 2020 global status report for buildings and construction [Internet]. Nairobi: UNEP; 2020 [cited 2026 Apr 14]. Available from: https://globalabc.org
  29. Türk Standartları Enstitüsü. TS EN 17037+A1:2021 Binalarda günışığı. Ankara: TSE; 2021.
  30. European Committee for Standardization. EN 17037: Daylight in buildings. Brussels: CEN; 2018.
  31. Borisuit A, Linhart F, Scartezzini JL, Münch M. Effects of realistic office daylighting and electric lighting conditions on visual comfort, alertness and mood. Light Res Technol. 2015;47(2):192-209.
  32. Reinhart CF. Daylighting handbook I: Fundamentals, designing with the sun. Cambridge: Building Technology Press; 2014.
  33. World Green Building Council. Health, wellbeing and productivity in offices: The next chapter for green building [Internet]. London: WGBC; 2014 [cited 2026 Apr 14]. Available from: https://www.worldgbc.org
  34. Heschong Mahone Group. Daylighting in schools: An investigation into the relationship between daylighting and human performance. San Francisco: Pacific Gas and Electric Company; 1999.
  35. Boyce PR. Human factors in lighting. 3rd ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2014.
  36. Creswell JW. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2014.
  37. Fraenkel JR, Wallen NE, Hyun HH. How to design and evaluate research in education. 8th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2012.
  38. Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE. Multivariate data analysis. 7th ed. Harlow: Pearson; 2014.
  39. Heerwagen JH, Hase B. Building biophilia: Connecting people to nature in building design. Environ Des Constr. 2001;3(3):30-6.
  40. Likert R. A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Arch Psychol. 1932;140:1-55.
  41. Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH. Psychometric theory. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1994.
  42. Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using multivariate statistics. 6th ed. Boston: Pearson; 2013.
  43. Field A. Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. 5th ed. London: Sage; 2018.
  44. European Committee for Standardization. EN 17037:2018+A1:2021 Daylight in buildings. Brussels: CEN; 2021.
  45. Browning W, Ryan C, Clancy J. 14 patterns of biophilic design. New York: Terrapin Bright Green; 2014.
  46. Altomonte S. “Daylight for Energy Savings and Psycho-Physiological Well-Being in Sustainable Built Environments.” Journal of Sustainable Development, 1(3), 2008.
  47. Kellert S. R., Heerwagen J., & Mador M. Biophilic Design: The Theory, Science and Practice of Bringing Buildings to Life. Wiley, 2008.
  48. Nieuwenhuis M., Knight C., Postmes T., & Haslam S. A. “The Relative Benefits of Green Versus Lean Office Space: Three Field Experiments.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 20(3), 199–214, 2014.
  49. Ochoa C. E., & Capeluto I. G. “Strategic Decision-Making for Intelligent Buildings: Comparative Impact of Passive Design Strategies and Active Features in a Hot Climate.” Building and Environment, 43(11), 1829–1839, 2008.