Journals / Çevre Şehir ve İklim Dergisi / 2026 / Sayı: 9

SUSTAINABLE DESIGN: A PERSPECTIVE FROM ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS

Sürdürülebilir Tasarım: Çevresel Etik Perspektifinden Bir Okuma

Şevket Alp(VAN YÜZÜNCÜ YIL ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-9552-4848
Pages
82–99
Publication Date
2026-06-30
DOI
—
🏛️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)

In conclusion, it is argued that while the sustainable design approach serves as a technical tool for the disciplines of architecture and planning, it must also be evaluated holistically in the context of ethical responsibility, ecological balance, and professional practice.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The global climate crisis highlights multifaceted environmental problems such as energy consumption, depletion of natural resources, and ecosystem destruction.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The decisive role of the built environment and design practices in the creation of these problems is increasingly being discussed.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In conclusion, it is argued that while the sustainable design approach serves as a technical tool for the disciplines of architecture and planning, it must also be evaluated holistically in the context of ethical responsibility, ecological balance, and professional practice.
🔬Design:Derleme
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Sürdürülebilir Tasarım · Çevresel Etik · Yapılı Çevre

Abstract

The global climate crisis highlights multifaceted environmental problems such as energy consumption, depletion of natural resources, and ecosystem destruction. The decisive role of the built environment and design practices in the creation of these problems is increasingly being discussed. Sustainability is a global approach that creates systems to address these problems. Sustainability is a global approach that creates systems to address these problems.. This article addresses the phenomenon of sustainable design not merely as a technical solution, but as a holistic paradigm shift encompassing environmental ethics, ecological awareness, and systems thinking. Within the scope of the research, the decisive role of buildings in energy consumption and carbon emissions is examined through the concepts of "life cycle" and "embedded energy." Based on McDonough and Braungart's "cradle-to-cradle" approach and the "Waste = Food" paradigm, it is argued that design should be redefined as environmentally harmonious, circular, and regenerative systems. Another focus of the study is the concept of ecological footprint, which makes visible the relationship between individual consumption practices and spatial and design systems. It is shown that individual and societal ecological footprints stem not only from user preferences but also from the designed environments that guide these preferences. In this context, sustainability; The discussion is based on the shared responsibility of designers, users, and policymakers. In conclusion, it is argued that while the sustainable design approach serves as a technical tool for the disciplines of architecture and planning, it must also be evaluated holistically in the context of ethical responsibility, ecological balance, and professional practice.

Özet

Küresel iklim krizi, enerji tüketimi başta olmak üzere doğal kaynakların tükenmesi ve ekosistem tahribatı gibi çok katmanlı çevre sorunlarını görünür kılmaktadır. Bu sorun- ların oluşmasında yapılı çevre ve tasarım pratiklerinin belirleyici rolü giderek daha fazla tartışılmaktadır. Sürdürülebilirlik, bu sorunlara sistem üreten küresel bir yaklaşımdır. Bu makale, sürdürülebilir tasarım olgusunu teknik bir çözümün ötesinde; çevresel etik, ekolojik bilinç ve sistem düşüncesini kapsayan bütüncül bir paradigma değişimi olarak ele almaktadır. Araştırma kapsamında, binaların enerji tüketimi ve karbon salımındaki belirleyici rolü “yaşam döngüsü” ve “gömülü enerji” kavramları üzerinden incelen- mektedir. McDonough ve Braungart’ın “beşikten beşiğe” yaklaşımı ve “atık=gıda” paradigması kapsamında, tasarımın doğayla uyumlu, döngüsel ve yenileyici sistemler olarak yeniden tanımlanması gerektiği savunulmaktadır. Çalışmanın bir diğer odağını, bireysel tüketim pratikleri ile mekânsal ve tasarımsal sistemler arasındaki ilişkiyi görünür kılan ekolojik ayak izi kavramı oluşturmaktadır. Bireysel ve toplumsal ekolojik ayak izinin hem kullanıcı tercihlerinden hem de bu tercihleri yönlendiren tasarlanmış çevrelerden kaynaklandığı ortaya konmaktadır. Bu çerçevede sürdürülebilirlik; tasarımcı, kullanıcı ve politika yapıcıların ortak sorumluluğu temelinde tartışılmaktadır. Sonuç olarak, sürdürülebilir tasarım yaklaşımının mimarlık ve planlama disiplinleri için teknik bir araç olmasının yanında, etik sorumluluk, ekolojik denge ve mesleki uygulamalar bağlamında bütüncül şekilde değerlendirilmesi gerektiği savunulmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Melikoğlu, Y., Alp, Ş. (2026). SUSTAINABLE DESIGN: A PERSPECTIVE FROM ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS. Çevre Şehir ve İklim Dergisi, Sayı: 9, 82–99. https://ajindex.com/articles/1611530

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (36)

  1. Anjum, W., Ghufran, B., & Abbas, M. (2024). Ecological footprint: A bibliometric analysis. Environment, Development and Sustainability. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-024-05463-y
  2. Ashworth, A., & Perera, S. (2015). Cost studies of buildings (6th ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315708867
  3. Bauman, Z. (2010). Sosyolojik düşünmek (A. Yılmaz, Çev.). İstanbul: Ayrıntı Yayınları. Brand, S. (1994). How buildings learn: What happens after they’re built. Viking Press.
  4. Çalış, E. (2025). Ütopyadan gerçekliğe: Sanatta doğanın sınırlandırılması, temsili ve ekolojik onarımı üzerine kurgular. Sanat Yazıları, 53, 439–455. https://doi.org/10.61742/ sanatyazilari.1734963
  5. Çelik, E. E. (2017). Doğa ve insan ilişkisi bakımından bilimde geçmiş ve gelecek. ETHOS: Felsefe ve Toplumsal Bilimlerde Diyaloglar, 10(2), 96–110.
  6. Daud, S., Wan Hanafi, W. N. W., Ayodele, B. V., Rajadurai, J., Mustapa, S. I., Ahmad, N. N., Wan Abdullah, W. M. T., Toolib, S. N., Asha’ari, M. J., & Afsarizal, H. A. (2023).
  7. Residential consumers’ lifestyle energy usage and energy efficiency in selected states in Malaysia. Energies, 16(8), 3514. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16083514
  8. Duman Yıldızbakan, T. (2025). Dijital çağda öznenin yeniden inşası: Hümanizmden transhümanizme biyopolitik ve etik dönüşümler. Medeniyet Sanat Dergisi, 11(2), 177–191. https://doi.org/10.46641/medeniyetsanat.1694187
  9. Emekci, Ş. (2021). Çevreye duyarlı mimarlık arayışında insan ve doğa ile uyumlu yapı üretme süreci. Journal of Architectural Sciences and Applications, 6(2), 538–554. https://doi.org/10.30785/mbud.935715
  10. Falsafi, A., Togiani, A., Colley, A., & Horttanainen, M. (2025). Life cycle assessment in circular design process: A systematic literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 521, Article 146188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2025.146188
  11. Fuller, R. B. (1969). Operating manual for spaceship earth. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
  12. Gasimova, E. N., Salehzadeh, G. S., & Humbatova, S. I. (2021). Design as a factor in the development of a country’s economy. Research in World Economy, 12(1), 82–92. https://doi.org/10.5430/rwe.v12n1p82
  13. Guiltinan, J. (2009). Creative destruction and destructive creations: Environmental ethics and planned obsolescence. Journal of Business Ethics, 89(Suppl. 1), 19–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9907-9
  14. Hertwich, E. G. (2005). Consumption and the rebound effect: An industrial ecology perspective. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 9(1–2), 85–98. https://doi. org/10.1162/1088198054084635
  15. IEA (2024). World Energy Outlook 2024. International Energy Agency, Paris. https:// www.iea.org/reports/world-energy-outlook-2024
  16. IPCC (2023). Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/downloads/ report/IPCC_AR6_SYR_FullVolume.pdf
  17. Karabacak, P., & Dilmaç, S. (2021). 1851 yılı ve Sanayi Devrimi sonrası endüstride seri üretim bağlamında tasarımın rolü. Sanat ve Tasarım Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(2), 31–39.
  18. Kissi, E., Ansah, M. K., Ampofo, J., & Boakye, E. (2019, June). Critical review of the principles of design for disassembly. Paper presented at the Modular and Offsite Construction (MOC) Summit, Banff, AB, Canada. https://doi.org/10.29173/mocs114
  19. Lilley, D. (2009). Design for sustainable behaviour: Strategies and perceptions. Design Studies, 30(6), 704–720. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2009.05.001
  20. Menzies, G., Banfill, P. F. G., & Turan, S. (2007). Life-cycle assessment and embodied energy: A review. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, Construction Materials, 160(4), 135–143. https://doi.org/10.1680/coma.2007.160.4.135
  21. Mba, E. J., Okeke, F. O., Igwe, A. E., Ozigbo, C. A., Oforji, P. I., & Ozigbo, I. W. (2024). Evolving trends and challenges in sustainable architectural design: A practice perspective. Heliyon, 10(20), e39400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e39400 McDonough, W., & Braungart, M. (2002). Cradle to cradle: Remaking the way we make things. North Point Press.
  22. Méndez, R., Ivanova, E., & Diana, A. (2023). Sustainable design: Green design, eco-efficiency, life cycle assessment. Review of Civil Engineering and Sustainable Technology, 5(1), 1–6.
  23. Mhatre, N., & Muley, K. (2022). Greenhouse gases and their impact on global warming. International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management (IJSREM), 6(7). https://doi.org/10.55041/IJSREM15350.
  24. Mick, M. (2025). Beyond sustainable: A responsible framework for design. The International Journal of Design Education, 20(1), 117–135. https://doi. org/10.18848/2325-128X/CGP/v20i01/117-135
  25. Ostapska, K., Rüther, P., Loli, A., & Gradeci, K. (2024). Design for Disassembly: A systematic scoping review and analysis of built structures Designed for Disassembly. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 48, 377–395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. spc.2024.05.014
  26. Papanek, V. (1971). Design for the real world: Human ecology and social change. New York, NY: Pantheon Books.
  27. Sartori, I., & Hestnes, A. G. (2007). Energy use in the life cycle of conventional and low-energy buildings: A review article. Energy and Buildings, 39(3), 249–257. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2006.07.001
  28. Semiz, G. D., Torun, E., Shahbazi, A., & Yurtseven, E. (2024). İklim adaleti çerçevesinde bazı ülkelerin karbon emisyonlarının karşılaştırmalı analizi. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi, 29(3), 835–845. https://doi.org/10.37908/mkutbd.1491458
  29. Scott, J. C. (2022). Tahıla karşı: En eski devletlerin derin tarihi (A. E. Pilgir, Çev.). Koç Üniversitesi Yayınları.
  30. United Nations. (2008). Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future. Transmitted to the General Assembly as an Annex to document A/42/427. http://www.un-documents.net/ocf-ov.htm (Erişim Tarihi: 20.01.2026).
  31. van Kooten, G. C., & Bulte, E. H. (2000). The ecological footprint: Useful science or politics? Ecological Economics, 32(3), 385–389. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921- 8009(99)00160-3
  32. Van der Ryn, S., & Cowan, S. (1996). Ecological design (10th anniversary ed.). Island Press.
  33. Wang, L., Cao, J., Zheng, Y., Xu, Y., You, L., & Wang, Y. (2024). Factors influencing public building energy consumption: A case study of Changjiang River Administration of Navigation Affairs in China. Sustainability, 16(10), 4289. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su16104289
  34. Williams, D. E. (2007). Sustainable design: Ecology, architecture, and planning (1st ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
  35. Zarco-Soto, F. J., Zarco-Soto, I. M., Sharif Ali, S. S., & Zarco-Periñán, P. J. (2025). Energy consumption in buildings: A compilation of current studies. Energy Reports, 13, 1293–1307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2024.12.069
  36. Zengin, N., & Yamaçlı, R. (2022). Çevresel ve ekolojik stratejilerle kapsayıcı mimari tasarım modeli. Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi (GUFBD / GUJS), 12(3), 744–755. https://doi.org/10.17714/gumusfenbil.1048304