Abstract
The modern construction technologies mostly dependent on nonrenewable resources so impose grave challenge to the environment; thus, widespread concern can be found in terms of sustainability of modern construction materials. Earth technology is the ideal tool to tackle the global crisis of environmental degradation; however, such constructions are limited worldwide. Unlike other countries, Bhutan has a considerable fraction of wattle and daub houses. This study reports the construction technology of traditional wattle and daub houses in Bhutan and performs sustainability analysis. The conventional sustainability assessment framework is modified with three additional parameters. Furthermore, sustainability of brick and stone masonry constructions is compared with wattle and daub systems. The sum of findings highlights that wattle and daub houses are more sustainable solutions than other dominant structural forms in Bhutan.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Gautam D, Adhikari R, Jha P, Rupakhety R, Yadav M (2020) Windstorm vulnerability of residential buildings and infrastructures in south-central Nepal. J Wind Eng Ind Aerodyn 198:104113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jweia.2020.104113
Bayode O, Michael Y, Adedeji D (2017) Review of economic and environmental bene fi ts of earthen materials for housing in Africa. Front Archit Res 6(4):519–528. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2017.08.003
Bhutan Swiss Intercooperatin, “Biennial report,” 2014.
MoWHS, “Infrastructure Development in Bhutan - A journey through time,” Bhutan, 2015.
Sajan KC, Gautam D (2021) Progress in sustainable structural engineering: a review. Innov Infrastruct Solut. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-020-00419-3
Ministry of Works and Human Settlement Bhutan (2013) Bhutan Green Building Design Guidelines. Bhutan Green Build Des Guid, p 126
Chettri N, Wangmo C, Passang S (2020) Quality control of concrete in bhutanese construction industry and the requirements of Indian standards. GNH J Constr Technol Manag, 1(1):23–34 [Online]. Available: http://www.cdb.gov.bt/uploads/downloads/Construction Journal Final.pdf.
NEC RGOB (2012) National adaptation programme of action
Al Waer H, Sibley M (2005) Building sustainability assessment methods: indicators, applications, limitations and development trends. Conf. Sustain. Build. South East Asia, no April, pp 11–13, [Online]. Available: https://www.irbnet.de/daten/iconda/CIB_DC23506.pdf.
Royal Government of Bhutan, “Bhutan Building Regulation,” 2018.
Der Yu W, Cheng ST, Ho WC, Chang YH (2018) Measuring the sustainability of construction projects throughout their lifecycle: a Taiwan Lesson. Sustain. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10051523
Aktas YD et al (2020) Outdoor thermal comfort and building energy use potential in different land-use areas in tropical cities: case of Kuala Lumpur. Atmosphere (Basel). https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos11060652
Alnaser NW, Flanagan R, Alnaser WE (2008) Model for calculating the sustainable building index (SBI) in the kingdom of Bahrain. Energy Build 40(11):2037–2043. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2008.05.015
Asadi E, Shen Z, Zhou H, Salman A, Li Y (2020) Risk-informed multi-criteria decision framework for resilience, sustainability and energy analysis of reinforced concrete buildings. J Build Perform Simul 13(6):804–823. https://doi.org/10.1080/19401493.2020.1824016
Ben-Alon L, Loftness V, Harries KA, Cochran Hameen E (2019) Integrating earthen building materials and methods into mainstream construction using environmental performance assessment and building policy. In: IOP conference series: earth and environmental science vol 323(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/323/1/012139.
Tomal M (2020) Moving towards a smarter housing market: the example of poland sustainability moving towards a smarter housing market: the example of Poland. no. January. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12020683.
Silvero F, Rodrigues F, Montelpare S (2020) Energy efficiency policies to face buildings’ climate change effects in Paraguay. Appl Sci. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10113979
Tomovska R, Radivojević A (2017) Tracing sustainable design strategies in the example of the traditional Ohrid house. J Clean Prod. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.01.073
Lidón de Miguel M, Vegas F, Mileto C, García-Soriano L (2021) Return to the native earth: historical analysis of foreign influences on traditional architecture in Burkina Faso. Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13020757
Habibi S (2019) Design concepts for the integration of bamboo in contemporary vernacular architecture. Archit Eng Des Manag. https://doi.org/10.1080/17452007.2019.1656596
Mazraeh HM, Pazhouhanfar M (2018) Effects of vernacular architecture structure on urban sustainability case study: Qeshm Island, Iran. Front Archit Res. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2017.06.006
Carlos JS (2016) Sustainability assessment of government school buildings in Portugal. Archit Sci Rev. https://doi.org/10.1080/00038628.2016.1167666
Gautam D, Prajapati J, Paterno KV, Bhetwal KK, Neupane P (2016) Disaster resilient vernacular housing technology in Nepal. Geoenviron Disasters 3(1):1–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40677-016-0036-y
Bodach S, Lang W, Hamhaber J (2014) Climate responsive building design strategies of vernacular architecture in Nepal. Energy Build. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2014.06.022
Hamard E, Cazacliu B, Razakamanantsoa A, Morel J (2016) Cob, a vernacular earth construction process in the context of modern sustainable building. Build Environ 106:103–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.06.009
Florides GA, Tassou SA, Kalogirou SA, Wrobel LC (2002) Measures used to lower building energy consumption and their cost effectiveness. Appl Energy. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0306-2619(02)00119-8
Emmanuel R (2004) Estimating the environmental suitability of wall materials : preliminary results from Sri Lanka. Build Environ 39:1253–1261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2004.02.012
Mueller HS, Haist M, Moffatt JS, Vogel M (2017) Design, material properties and structural performance of sustainable concrete. Procedia Eng 171:22–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.01.306
Chettri N, Gautam D, Rupakhety R (2021) Seismic vulnerability of vernacular residential buildings in Bhutan. J Earthq Eng 26(1):1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632469.2020.1868362
Chettri N, Gautam D, Rupakhety R (2021) From Tship Chim to Pa Chim: Seismic vulnerability and strengthening of Bhutanese vernacular buildings. In: Rupakhety R, Gautam D (eds) Masonry construction in active seismic regions, 1st edn. Elsevier, Amsterdam
RGoB, Population & housing census of bhutan. RGoB, 2017.
Traditional Architecture Guidelines, “Traditional Architecture Guidelines.”
Chettri N, Thinley J, Koirala GS (2019) The comparative study on vernacular Dwellings in Bhutan. United Int J Res Technol 01(02):42–47
Earthquake Resistant Training Mannual Bhutan (2013) Earthquake resistant Construction Training Mannual. EarthquakeTraining Mannual
2009–2011 World Bank, RGoB & UN, Scanned by CamScanner. 2016.
Pacheco-torgal F, Jalali S (2012) Earth construction : lessons from the past for future eco-efficient construction. Constr Build Mater 29:512–519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2011.10.054
Lagaros ND (2007) Life-cycle cost analysis of design practices for RC framed structures. Bull Earthq Eng 5(3):425–442. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10518-007-9038-1
Asare KAB, Ruikar KD, Zanni M, Soetanto R (2020) “BIM-based LCA and energy analysis for optimised sustainable building design in Ghana. SN Appl Sci. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-020-03682-2
Elhakeem A, Hegazy T (2012) Building asset management with deficiency tracking and integrated life cycle optimisation. Struct Infrastruct Eng 8(8):729–738. https://doi.org/10.1080/15732471003777071
Ministry of Works and Human Settlement Bhutan, “Bhutan Schedule of Rates 2021,” Thimphu, 2021. https://www.nsb.gov.bt/.
Ministry of Works and Human Settlement, “Labour and Material Coefficient 2021,” Thimphu, 2021. https://www.nsb.gov.bt/.
Müller HS, Haist M, Vogel M (2014) Assessment of the sustainability potential of concrete and concrete structures considering their environmental impact, performance and lifetime. Constr Build Mater 67(PART C):321–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2014.01.039
Lisa van der Zanden M (2018) Assessment of the seismic performance and sustainability of the Kath-Kuni building style in the Indian Himalaya. TU Delft, Netherlands
Sanya T (2012) Sustainable architecture evaluation method in an African context: transgressing discipline boundaries with a systems approach. Sustain Sci 7(1):55–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-011-0137-1
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
Authors declare no conflict of interest.
Appendix
Appendix
Survey form
*Required-Questionaries to Manufacturers/factories/suppliers
-
1.
Organization /Company's Name; *
-
2.
Name of Owner; *
-
3.
Product Manufactured;(types of bricks/dimension) *
-
4.
Dzongkhag; *
-
5.
Exact location (Gewog/ village/Thromde/.)
-
6.
Machinery used for Manufacturing;( mixing/Molding /heating /.) *
-
7.
Mode of Operation (Electricity/fuel/.); *
-
8.
Average amount paid for Electricity or fuel in a month; *
-
9.
Rate per units of electricity;
-
10.
Average Number of bricks manufactured in a month; *
-
11.
List of Raw material used; *
-
12.
Place from where raw material is extracted; (exact location); *
-
13.
Estimated duration of service life(guarantee) of bricks; *
-
14.
Average transportation charges per truck to bring Raw materials to factory site from place of extraction; *
-
15.
Average Number of Labor working daily to running factory site; *
-
16.
Labor charges per day (Wages)
*Required-Questionaries to local people (both rural and urban)
-
1.
Name of House Owner
-
2.
Building type -Mark only one oval.
| Residential building |
| Commercial building |
| Residential cum |
| Commercial office building: |
| Other (specify): |
-
3.
Age of Building:(or Year when it was built)
-
4.
What was the total Cost for the complete construction of building?
-
5.
Dimensions of building: {Plinth Area} *
-
6.
Number of rooms; (Would be grateful if you could provide us the Numbers of rooms in each floor): *
-
7.
Floor type:
-
8.
Maximum Room Size:
-
9.
Height of room: *
-
10.
Part of a building that needed frequent Maintenance and Repair; *
-
11.
Amount of money spend for Maintenance / repairs in a year; *
-
12.
Do you have hands- on experience of construction? *
-
13.
Do you prefer to live in same housing typology? *
-
14.
Did your construction activities cause damage to environment? *
-
15.
Which type of building materials do you prefer a. concrete, b. Bricks, c. Earth products*.
-
16.
Rate the previous answer in 50%, 75% and 100%*
-
17.
Do you recycle any building materials, if so rate in same range in previous question? *
-
18.
Rate the sustainability parameters of headings for level of importance based on a scale of 1–5 which is known as Likert Scale, where 1 is ‘least important,’ 2 ‘fairly important,’ 3 ‘important,’ 4 ‘very important,’ and 5 ‘extremely important’*.
*Required-Questionaries to field expertise (based on qualification – 1. academic qualification, 2. professional qualification and 3. number of years in work experience)
-
1.
Name and option you fall from listed personnel above (1,2 & 3) *.
-
2.
Rate the sustainability parameters of headings for level of importance based on a scale of 1–5 which is known as Likert Scale, where 1 is ‘least important,’ 2 ‘fairly important,’ 3 ‘important,’ 4 ‘very important,’ and 5 ‘extremely important’*.
-
3.
Number of working experiences? *
-
4.
Which material is socially and culturally preferred? *
-
5.
Rate the sustainability parameters of headings in 25%, 50%, 75% and 100% based on their importance*.
-
6.
Rate in scale of previous question the level of research undertaken in Bhutan*.
-
7.
Express your opinion on building materials and its associated research*.
-
8.
Which type of materials is easy to construct, rate in above scale*.
-
9.
Which type of materials is durable, rate in above scale*.
-
10.
Which type of materials is effective to recycle, rate in above scale*.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Chettri, N., Gautam, D., Chikermane, S. et al. Sustainability assessment of Bhutanese vernacular wattle and daub houses. Innov. Infrastruct. Solut. 6, 210 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-021-00576-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-021-00576-z