climate

Review
Exploring Low-Carbon Design and Construction Techniques:
Lessons from Vernacular Architecture
Ming Hu

School of Architecture, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN 46556, USA; mhu1@[Link]

Abstract: This paper presents a comprehensive review of low-carbon materials and construction
techniques commonly used in vernacular buildings. The study highlights the relevance of vernacular
architecture in the context of the shift towards sustainable construction practices. A combination
of a climatic zone map, vernacular language type map, and continent map is used to identify
the vernacular regions. Eight bio-based low-carbon materials, including wood, adobe, rammed
earth, cob, sod, thatch, bamboo, and straw bales, are discussed, along with their characteristics,
availability, and environmental impacts. The construction techniques associated with these materials
are explained, emphasizing their simplicity, cost-effectiveness, and adaptability. The paper also
explores two important design approaches: design for disassembly and design for modularity that
were used in vernacular building. The review found the use of low-carbon materials and construction
techniques derived from vernacular architecture can contribute to minimizing waste, reducing
environmental impacts, and promoting a circular economy in the building industry. This research
provides valuable insights for architects, engineers, and policymakers seeking sustainable alternatives
in the construction sector.

Keywords: life cycle; low carbon; bio-based material; vernacular; design for disassembly; modularity

1. Introduction
1.1. Research Motivation
Citation: Hu, M. Exploring The recent circular economy movement aims to move the industry (including the
Low-Carbon Design and building industry) from a linear to a circular model, which is characterized by a continu-
Construction Techniques: Lessons ous loop from production to recycling that results in minimal waste and environmental
from Vernacular Architecture. Climate impact [1,2]. In the past, researchers suggested that the building and construction industry
2023, 11, 165. [Link] adopt a preindustrial model in which bio-based materials are used and the material cy-
10.3390/cli11080165 cle is closed with minimal waste [2]. In today’s world, this model can be described as a
low-carbon approach, which uses natural (bio-based) resources and minimizes waste [3,4].
Academic Editor: Nir Y. Krakauer
However, this model seems unrealistic to many practitioners and policy makers in the
Received: 15 June 2023 building sector, mainly because it relies heavily on high-tech solutions with a high cost.
Revised: 23 July 2023 Multiple researchers have suggested a shift to alternative approaches and solutions that
Accepted: 27 July 2023 are low tech and low cost, such as returning to traditional and vernacular construction
Published: 31 July 2023 technologies that have been used by local communities for centuries [4–7].
A signature characteristic of vernacular buildings is their use of bio-based materials,
which refer to products that mainly consist of substances derived from living organisms
and either occur naturally or are synthesized [8]. Some common bio-based materials are
Copyright: © 2023 by the author.
wood and leather. They may also refer to products made by processes that use biomass [8];
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
in this sense, soil can be counted as a bio-based material. Bio-based materials convert CO2
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
into biomass through photosynthesis during the plant’s growth before being processed
conditions of the Creative Commons
to make building materials [9]. Soil carbon sequestration is a process in which CO2 is
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// transferred from the atmosphere and stored in the soil through plants [10].
[Link]/licenses/by/ Among all bio-based materials, wood has received the most attention [9]. In recent
4.0/). years, many scholars and policy makers in developed countries have mainly focused on the

Climate 2023, 11, 165. [Link] [Link]

Climate 2023, 11, 165 2 of 18

promotion of wood buildings, especially mass timber construction, as the key solution to
reducing embodied carbon emissions from the building sector [11]. Researchers have even
advocated using engineered timber to turn the global building stock into a carbon sink to
mitigate the climate crisis [12]. This solution is incomplete and biased due to two factors.
The first factor is a global supply and demand mismatch, which has been overlooked. As
pointed out by [13], the largest forest areas that allow for the sustainable sourcing of wood
building materials exist in the Global North, that is in North America and Europe, despite
these developed countries having much lower new construction rates and demand [13].
The global building stock is expected to double in size, and the largest new building
stock increase will happen in developing countries in Africa and Asia, accompanied by
a population growth [13]. By 2055, Asia’s population is expected to peak at 5.4 billion,
while by 2100, Africa’s population is expected to reach 10.9 billion [11]. In those areas
with the highest population growth, the demand for wood as a primary construction
material cannot be fulfilled [9]. The second factor is the heavy reliance on high-tech and
high-cost solutions; for example, cross-laminated timber demands a large and sophisticated
manufacturing process that leads to a high capital cost [14]. These high-tech and high-cost
solutions are not accessible to most developing countries, which have the highest demand
for new construction. Regardless of the impracticality of mass timber construction in many
countries, the research and development of mass timber is still heavily promoted and
funded by many funding agencies.
There is a need to rethink the approach of finding one solution and implementing it
everywhere. Rather, other low-carbon solutions should be considered that are derived from
locally available materials and construction knowledge and that are low cost, practical,
flexible, and adaptable. Vernacular architecture naturally becomes the resource for drawing
knowledge and inspiration.

1.2. Vernacular Architecture

Vernacular architecture has been widely understood as “the architectural language
of the people with its ethnic, regional, and local dialects: the product of non-experts” [15].
Vernacular architecture responds to local climatic, material, and crafts conditions and re-
flects the culture, customs, and lifestyle of the local community [16]. Many of the design
and construction practices in vernacular architecture are the core of sustainable design
principles, which are environmentally friendly and less energy intensive than their modern
counterparts [17]. The use of locally available materials and construction techniques famil-
iar to local builders is one of the most important characteristics of vernacular architecture
and is an identity factor of regional differentiation [18]. Since the Industrial Revolution,
the increasing use of heavy processed and standardized building materials (e.g., steel)
has led to the homogenization of design and construction techniques and consequently
the buildings’ appearance, the so-called International Style [19]. The wide adoption of
mass-produced building materials, such as concrete and steel, directly contributes to the
disappearing use of local and traditional techniques and materials, or vernacular architec-
ture. In modern architecture, many industrially produced materials not only have a higher
energy intensity but also produce considerable environmental impacts, while in vernacular
building, natural materials have had positive impacts in their overall life cycle through
biogenetic benefits [20].
However, previous literature reviews on traditional buildings revealed a large gap
in facilitating “traditional knowledge for preservation and adaptation” and potentially
for building climate resilience [21]. Even though local knowledge and insights embedded
in vernacular building hold invaluable lessons regarding low-cost climate adaptation
strategies [22], they are often underestimated in policy and practice as a practical solution,
treated as a one-off example of folk tradition without scientific evidence [23]. To this extent,
this paper explores the knowledge and use of various bio-based materials in vernacular
buildings globally. It is based on previous vernacular building studies in Africa, Asia,
Europe, and North America. The review divides the vernacular materials into three
Climate 2023, 11, 165 3 of 18

categories: primary natural materials, secondary natural materials, and light-processed

materials. Light-processed materials can be derived from natural or synthetic sources
and undergo various processing techniques such as foaming, aerating, or incorporating
additives to reduce density while maintaining structural or other strength. The processing
methods may involve altering the chemical composition, physical structure, or surface
properties of the materials. Two design and construction techniques commonly used in
vernacular architecture—design for disassembly and design for modularity—are explained
in terms of their application and benefits.

2. Research Methodology and Materials

To extract information about the materials used in vernacular architecture, we took
the first step of categorizing the vernacular architecture regions. Since climatic conditions,
cultural heritage, and geographic location shape vernacular architecture, we adopted the
method by [24] to categorize the regions based on these three traits. To classify the climatic
regions, we used a simplified Köppen climate classification, which divides the world into
11 zones for this study [25]. To map the cultural heritage, this study adopted a method
commonly used by anthropologists, that is, tracing language families based on linguistic
similarities. In fact, vernacular is a linguistic term [26]. While religion, geographic location,
dialect, and ethnicity can change within a group of people, basic language traits—such as
syntax, phonetics, and semantics–often remain the same, and are strong indicators of a
shared culture heritage [27]. In this study, the language family division developed from
the Evolution of Human Languages project [28] was adopted. Geographic boundaries
(continent map) is the last characteristic in developing the vernacular region, according to
the notion that geography-specific conditions determine the available building materials.
In addition, barriers between continents, such as mountains and oceans, create obstacles to
migration, and thus the local culture and traditions are confined in the place that is critical
for developing vernacular tradition [28,29].
Combining a climatic zone map, language map, and continent map resulted in
114 vernacular regions. After defining those vernacular regions, a literature review on
vernacular architecture building materials and construction techniques was conducted.
Meanwhile, an extensive online photo search was conducted for vernacular buildings to
better understand the wide range of vernacular material distribution. Since this study
focuses on low-carbon, sustainable lessons that can be drawn from vernacular buildings,
particular attention is given to vernacular architecture practices within climate zones and
continents. Three categories and eight types of representative low-carbon materials used
in vernacular architecture are identified in Section 3. Moreover, two low-carbon design
and construction techniques that are prevalent in many vernacular regions are explained
in Section 4. The conclusion and discussion are presented in Section 5. Table 1 lists the
key materials and construction techniques as follows: column 1 contains the materials and
techniques, column 2 provide references to the literature where they are found, and column
3 specifies their application by region. The listed materials and techniques are explained
in details in the following subsections. Detailed explanations of the listed materials and
techniques can be found in the subsequent subsections.

Table 1. Literature included in this review.

Material Reference Region/Country

Adobe [30] China
[31] Portugal
[32] Middle East
[33] Africa
[34] Egypt
[35] Egypt
[36] Egypt
Climate 2023, 11, 165 4 of 18

Table 1. Cont.

Material Reference Region/Country

[37] Global
[38] France
[39] United States
[40] Tanzania
[41] Fertile Crescent
Rammed earth
[42] China
[4] Portugal
[1] Global
[43] British Isles
Cob [44] France
[45] United States
[46] Global
[47] Europe
[48] Central Asia
[49] Nigeria
[50] Yemen
[51] Britain
[52] Italy
[53] Britain
Sod [54] North America
Thatch (reed) [55] Middle East
[56] Global
[57] Japan
[58] Indonesia
Bamboo [59] South Korea
[60] Ghana
[61] India
[62] Italy
[63] India
[64] Global
[65] Global
[66] Global
[67] India
Straw bale [68] Nigeria
[69] Africa
[70] Middle East
[71] Global
[72] Britain
[73] Portugal
[74] New Zealand
[75] Italy
Cordwood [76] France
Poland, Scandinavia,
Central Europe, Eastern
[77]
Canada, and Northern
United States
Scandinavia, Canada,
[78]
Northern United States
[79] North America, Europe
[80] Canada

3. Use of Bio-Based (Low-Carbon) Materials in Vernacular Architecture

Three bio-based-material categories can be identified in vernacular buildings: primary
natural materials, secondary natural materials, and light-processed materials. Primary
natural materials refer to the materials found in the natural environment and applied
directly to the building construction. Wood, stone, bamboo, mud brick (natural dry),
and grass are popular natural raw materials across different climatic regions, and their
application extends to the entire world. The second category, secondary natural materials,
uses processed natural materials from other industries to make building materials or
components; for example, waste wood from logging and agricultural residue (e.g., straw).
A large portion of the first and second categories’ low-carbon materials sequester CO2
 applied directly to the building construction. Wood, stone, bamboo, mud brick (natural
dry), and grass are popular natural raw materials across different climatic regions, and
their application extends to the entire world. The second category, secondary natural
materials, uses processed natural materials from other industries to make building
Climate 2023, 11, 165
materials or components; for example, waste wood from logging and agricultural residue
5 of 18
(e.g., straw). A large portion of the first and second categories’ low-carbon materials
sequester CO2 during their growth as plants and possess a negative carbon footprint. The
third category, light-processed natural materials, refers to fired brick, terracotta tiles,
during their growth as plants and possess a negative carbon footprint. The third category,
burnt wood, and other natural materials that require light processes such as kiln drying.
light-processed natural materials, refers to fired brick, terracotta tiles, burnt wood, and
Since there are extensive studies and robust knowledge on light-processed natural
other natural materials that require light processes such as kiln drying. Since there are
materials, and they are still widely used today, this paper will focus only on the first two
extensive studies and robust knowledge on light-processed natural materials, and they
categories. In the following subsections, the most commonly used vernacular materials in
are still widely used today, this paper will focus only on the first two categories. In the
each category are explained. In Table 2, the embodied carbon emission intensity and the
following subsections, the most commonly used vernacular materials in each category are
mechanical and thermal properties of the materials are listed, and references are provided.
explained. In Table 2, the embodied carbon emission intensity and the mechanical and
thermal properties of the materials are listed, and references are provided.
Table 2. Embodied carbon intensity of vernacular materials and references.

Table 2. Embodied Embodied Tensile

carbon intensity of vernacular materials and references.
Compressive Conductivity
Categories Materials Sample Carbon Strength References
Strength (Mpa)
Compressive Tensile (W/mk)
Categories Materials Sample
(kg COCarbon
Embodied 2eq/kg)
Strength
(Mpa)
Strength
Conductivity
References
(kg CO2eq /kg) (W/mk)
Wood 0.5 (Mpa) (Mpa) [81]
Wood 0.5 [81]
Primary natural raw material

Rammed 0.26 (only A1–

1.0–2.5 0.1–0.35 0.833–1.4 [4,82]
earth
Rammed earth A3)
0.26 (only A1–A3) 1.0–2.5 0.1–0.35 0.833–1.4 [4,82]

Sod block NA NA NA NA [54,83]

Primary natural raw material

Sod block NA NA NA NA [54,83]

Adobe
Adobe block 0.0018–0.013
0.0018–0.013 0.66–3.04
0.66–3.04 0.12–0.4
0.12–0.4 0.516
0.516 [31,84]
[31,84]
block

CobCob NA
NA 0.24–0.4
0.24–0.4 2.5 kN/m22
2.5 kN/m NA
NA [45,46]
[45,46]

Thatch
Thatch 0.48
0.48 0.67
0.67 0.32
0.32 0.063
0.063 [85,86]
[85,86]

Bamboo 0.5 4.1–38 7.6–35 0.21–0.34 [66,86,87]

Bamboo 0.5 4.1–38 7.6–35 0.21–0.34 [66,86,87]
natural raw
Secondary

material
Secondary natural

Straw bale 0.4 NA 0.15–0.35 0.03–0.19 [71,75,88]

raw material

Straw bale 0.4 NA 0.15–0.35 0.03–0.19 [71,75,88]

Cordwood 0.43–2.14
130 MJ/kg 0.128–0.161 [73,76,89,90]
masonry 0.9–1.8

3.1. Primary Raw Materials

3.1.1. Adobe Block (Mud Brick)
As illustrated in Table 1, adobe is one of the earliest materials humans used to construct
buildings worldwide and can be found in China [30], Europe [31], North America [39], the
Middle East [32], and Africa [33] (refer to Figure 1). Several historians and archeologists
indicate Mesopotamia as the origin of adobe brick use, later spreading to Egypt where mud
from the Nile River mixed with straw was used to construct simple houses [35,36]. Some of
the earliest adobe buildings recorded can be traced to ancient Egypt. Adobe is masonry
 As illustrated in Table 1, adobe is one of the earliest materials humans used to
construct buildings worldwide and can be found in China [30], Europe [31], North
America [39], the Middle East [32], and Africa [33] (refer to Figure 1). Several historians
and archeologists indicate Mesopotamia as the origin of adobe brick use, later spreading
Climate 2023, 11, 165 to Egypt where mud from the Nile River mixed with straw was used to construct simple 6 of 18
houses [35,36]. Some of the earliest adobe buildings recorded can be traced to ancient
Egypt. Adobe is masonry block that is made of mixed clay, sand, gravel, and straw. It is
sundried
block thatand usedof
is made tomixed
build thick masonry
clay, sand, walls
gravel, and[37]. EvenItthough
straw. the portion
is sundried and used of straw
to buildis
small, but it play important role to bind the adobe blocks together and
thick masonry walls [37]. Even though the portion of straw is small, but it play important allowing them to
dry
role evenly
to bind totheprevent cracking
adobe blocks due toand
together uneven
allowingshrinkage
them to[38].
dry Adobe
evenly tois prevent
low cost,cracking
locally
available, recyclable,
due to uneven and[38].
shrinkage adaptable
Adobeto is alow
large variety
cost, locallyofavailable,
soil [Link],
In addition,
anditadaptable
has good
thermal
to a largeand acoustic
variety properties
of soil types. In [32]. Its ease
addition, of construction
it has good thermalnot andonly makes
acoustic it accessible
properties [32].
to
Itsmany
ease ofpeople but alsonot
construction reduces labor and
only makes equipment
it accessible requirements
to many andalso
people but consequently
reduces labor the
energy and emissions. Adobe also has disadvantages, such as low
and equipment requirements and consequently the energy and emissions. Adobe also has seismic strength [39].
As illustrated insuch
disadvantages, Figure 1a, most
as low seismicadobe
strengthbuildings,
[39]. Ascob, and rammed
illustrated earth1a,
in Figure buildings
most adobe are
buildings,
similar cob, and rammed
in appearance earth buildings
[40]; however, it differsare similar
from in appearance
rammed [40]; is
earth as water however,
added to it
differsthe
make from
adoberammed
[Link] as water is added to make the adobe block.

Figure 1. (a)
Figure 1. (a) Adobe
Adobe pueblo
pueblo in
in New
New Mexico,
Mexico, US
US (credit
(credit to Wikimedia Commons)
to Wikimedia Commons) and
and (b) Chinese
(b) Chinese
traditional tulou (credit to Wikimedia Commons).
traditional tulou (credit to Wikimedia Commons).

3.1.2. Rammed Earth

Rammed earth construction can be found on all continents except Antarctica, and it
is applicable to a wide range of climatic conditions due to its capacity to regulate thermal
transfer and humidity [82]. The earliest use of rammed earth as building material can be
found in 7th to 9th millennium BC, in Neolithic archaeological sites, such as the Fertile
Crescent [41].
[41].ItItwas alsoalso
was found in theinYangshao
found culture in
the Yangshao China,induring
culture theduring
China, 5th millennium
the 5th
millennium BC [42]. Rammed earth wall is made of a mix of sand, clay, gravel,
BC [42]. Rammed earth wall is made of a mix of sand, clay, silt, and small silt, andsimilar
small
to the adobe
gravel, similarblock.
to theTherefore,
adobe [Link]
Therefore, rammed earth isrammed
compressed similar to adobe
earth blocks to
is similar in
appearance,
adobe blocksuse, and performance
in appearance, use, and (Figure 1b). However,
performance (Figure unlike adobe, rammed
1b). However, earth
unlike adobe,
blocks doearth
rammed not require
blocks do water
not [40],
requireandwater
hence, theand
[40], construction
hence, the techniques
construction are different.
techniques
Rather than built blocks by blocks (adobe construction), rammed
are different. Rather than built blocks by blocks (adobe construction), rammed earth earth walls are built by
walls
layers. Each layer is about 15 cm to 15 cm thick soil; it is then placed
are built by layers. Each layer is about 15 cm to 15 cm thick soil; it is then placed and and tamped into
the rightinto
tamped location. After
the right the first
location. layer
After is first
the fullylayer
tamed, the second
is fully tamed, layer can belayer
the second addedcanand
be
tamped. Because there is no need to wait for the layers to be fully
added and tamped. Because there is no need to wait for the layers to be fully dried, thedried, the construction
time can be reduced.
construction time canAfter the entire
be reduced. wall
After theisentire
built and
wallformwork
is built and is formwork
removed, the rammed
is removed,
wall is left to dry and cure for several months. At the end, a layer of protective coating
is applied when it is necessary. After the rammed earth is completely cured, it behaves
similarly to soft sedimentary rock. The rammed earth walls can be thick, up to one meter,
and provide excellent thermal mass and structural stability.
There are also disadvantages of rammed earth, such as the requirement for sites to be
well drained and maintained and the concern of heavy rainfall. For structural purposes,
modern rammed earth buildings require bond or collar beams, as well as reinforced
rods. Similar to cob construction, rammed earth construction is labor-intensive due to the
compressing and tampering process. However, the use of modern mechanical equipment
has made the tamping process easier.

3.1.3. Cob Construction or (Unburnt) Clay Masonry

Cob has a similar material mix as adobe; the main difference between the two is the
construction technique. Adobe is first made into rectangular blocks that are sun dried
before being used to build, while cob is built while wet [46]. Cob materials and construction
Climate 2023, 11, 165 7 of 18

can be found in various climate conditions across the globe [47], and thus it is known by
many names, such as lump clay, puddled clay, and unbaked clay. Some of the oldest cob
houses can be found in Afghanistan [48], Nigeria [49], and Yemen [50]. In Europe, the
existing cob-building heritage can be found in Germany, the United Kingdom, and France,
and most of those cob buildings date back to the 18th and 19th centuries [47]. Cob walls
were often used as load bearing walls for one- to two-story structures [45].
A large variety of fibers were used in vernacular cob construction, based on the
availability of materials and local craftsmanship. The most common one was straw, with
other materials including barley, bean pods, grass, ferns, and leaves [47]. Fibers were used
for assisting handling [51], accelerating the drying process [91], enhancing cohesion and
shear resistance of the wall [92], improving weathering resistance, reinforcing the bond
between the batches, and distribution of shrinkage throughout the wall [51].
The raw mixture is rolled into bundles (cobs), which some researchers call a lift [48].
The soft bundles are stacked alongside or on top of one another to form layers of up to
45 to 90 cm thick and 10 to 120 cm high, tapering toward the top of the wall [51]. Different
from rammed earth construction, additional layer of cob lift is only allowed to be added on
the previous one after the previous layer is dried; consequently, cob construction is labor
intense and slow [47]. The average drying time of a cob lift ranges from 11 to 21 days, and
a whole cob wall can take up to 20 weeks [47].
Despite the labor-intensive nature, cob construction has many advantages. Compared
to rammed earth and adobe, cob performs better in terms of shear behavior; it can deform
beyond the elastic range with a gradual drop in capacity; therefore, it can be considered
as a seismic-resistant material [46]. In addition, research has also shown compacted cob
wall with straw reinforcement can resist total failure when subjected to initial flood con-
ditions [53]. As illustrated in Figure 2, adobe, cob, and rammed earth are often grouped
together and referred to as earth construction; while sharing similarities, because of the
differences of ingrediencies and construction techniques, they have different adoption
and implementation around the world. Among the three, rammed earth had the widest
adoption, as illustrated in Figure 2c.

Figure 2. Earth construction comparison. (a) Adobe construction. (b) Cob construction. (c) Rammed
earth construction.
Climate 2023, 11, 165 8 of 18

3.1.4. Sod Block

Sod refers to the layer including grass and the soil beneath held together by the
grassroots [83,93]. Sod is a logical choice, probably the only viable material in the places
where trees are limited, such as prairies. First, the sod strips were cut from the ground and
divided into blocks, then those blocks were stacked to construct thick walls. Because of the
simplicity, sod houses appear in many cultures [54], for example, the turf houses in Nordic
countries. Most times, the sod blocks were left unchanged, but in some cases, the sod walls
were then plastered with protective layers to increase their durability. In Nordic countries,
sod walls were built above and around an excavation or partial dugout to take advantage
of earth sheltering, which is an effective passive design strategy to increase the thermal
property of a building. Figure 3 illustrates a traditional sod (turf) house built in Iceland. In
remote areas, where modern construction materials are not easy to access, this construction
Climate 2023, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW
can be an alternative option. However, sod construction may not be a viable solution 9 of in
19
many locations because of limited supplies and its related environmental impact.

Figure3.3. Icelandic
Figure Icelandic turf
turf dugout
dugout house
house(credit
(creditto
toWikimedia
WikimediaCommons).
Commons).

3.1.5.
3.1.5. Thatch
Thatch
Thatch
Thatch construction
construction refers
refersto
toaabuilding
buildingtechnique
techniquethat thatuses
usesdry
dryvegetation
vegetationavailable
available
locally.
locally. Thatch roofs or walls provide a natural alternative to wood roofing when
Thatch roofs or walls provide a natural alternative to wood roofing when those
those
materials
materials are
are not
not readily
readily available.
available. Among
Among vegetation
vegetation thatthat can
can be
be used
used for
for thatch,
thatch, reed
reed
and straw are commonly used materials in many climatic conditions. Other
and straw are commonly used materials in many climatic conditions. Other materials have materials have
also
also been
been used,
used, such
such asaspalmetto
palmetto leaves
leaves in intropical
tropicalclimates.
climates. Reed
Reed grows
grows near
near wetlands
wetlands
along
along lakes, swamps, and other water canals, and it also can be found close to
lakes, swamps, and other water canals, and it also can be found close to agriculture
agriculture
fields
fields and
and sand
sand dunes
dunes [56].
[56]. Reed
Reed isis first
first found
found in in East
East Asia
Asia [57,58],
[57,58], and
and then
then has
has been
been
cultivated through the Middle East, North Africa, and Southern Europe for thousands of
cultivated through the Middle East, North Africa, and Southern Europe for thousands of
years [55]. Some of the earliest applications of reed as a building material can be found in
years [55]. Some of the earliest applications of reed as a building material can be found in
Egypt thousands of years ago [55], which was the predominant building technique in some
Egypt thousands of years ago [55], which was the predominant building technique in
regions for housing and communal spaces [56]. Thatch buildings and roofs in general are
some regions for housing and communal spaces [56]. Thatch buildings and roofs in
well ventilated and can be found in temperate, tropical, Mediterranean, and subtropical
general are well ventilated and can be found in temperate, tropical, Mediterranean, and
climatic regions [58]. It has good resistance to seismic forces due to its flexible structure [56].
subtropical climatic regions [58]. It has good resistance to seismic forces due to its flexible
The primary disadvantage of thatch roofs is their susceptibility to fire, insects, rodents,
structure [56]. The primary disadvantage of thatch roofs is their susceptibility to fire,
and rot.
insects, rodents, and rot.
Other materials used for thatch roof include straw and grass. The service life of some
Other materials used for thatch roof include straw and grass. The service life of some
thatch huts built with reed is surprisingly long; in Egypt, they can last for 20 years as long
thatch huts built with reed is surprisingly long; in Egypt, they can last for 20 years as long
as good-quality raw materials are used and regular maintenance is performed [57]. In
as good-quality
Japan, raw materials
some traditional are (made
thatch roofs used and withregular maintenance
straw thatch and grassis thatch)
performedhave[57]. In
lasted
Japan, some
40 to 50 years. traditional thatch roofs (made with straw thatch and grass thatch) have lasted
40 to 50 years.

3.1.6. Bamboo
Bamboo is a widely used natural material for global building construction. It is a
collective name for different species of giant grasses, with up to 90 genera of bamboo in
existence, comprising around 1500 species. Bamboo typically grows in subtropical,
Climate 2023, 11, 165 9 of 18

3.1.6. Bamboo
Bamboo is a widely used natural material for global building construction. It is a
collective name for different species of giant grasses, with up to 90 genera of bamboo in
existence, comprising around 1500 species. Bamboo typically grows in subtropical, tropical,
and mild temperate climate regions in Africa, Asia, South America, and Oceania [60,61].
Among more than a thousand species of bamboo, only about 20 to 30 species are used in
construction, with a few species commonly known and used: Moso bamboo (East Asia),
Guadua bamboo (America), Giant bamboo (Southeast Asia), and Oreobambos (Africa). In
vernacular buildings, bamboo can be used in many forms, such as whole culms, split
lengthwise, pressed flat, or woven in mats. The joints are made through tied ropes or by
Climate 2023, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 19
incision of the bamboo [62] (refer to Figure 4). These construction techniques are affordable
and simple.

[Link]
Figure Bamboo construction
construction in Chittagong
in Chittagong Hill Bangladesh
Hill Tracts, Tracts, Bangladesh (credit to Commons).
(credit to Wikimedia Wikimedia
Commons).
In recent years, the application of bamboo as a cheaper building material substitute for
timberInhasrecent years,
caught the application
practitioners’ of bamboo
attention. as a cheaper
It has been building affordable
used to construct material substitute
housing
in
fordeveloping
timber hascountries. Bamboo has aattention.
caught practitioners’ high compressive
It has beenstrength
used that is twice that
to construct of con-
affordable
crete, and its tensile strength is similar to that of steel [63]. Bamboo
housing in developing countries. Bamboo has a high compressive strength that is twice as a primary (e.g., trusses,
roof, walls,
that of foundation)
concrete, and secondary
and its tensile strength (e.g., flooring)
is similar to thatstructural material
of steel [63]. Bamboo hasas a relatively
a primary
high
(e.g.,strength
trusses, and
roof,low weight.
walls, Bamboo
foundation) cansecondary
and also be used asflooring)
(e.g., a scaffolding material
structural and ashas
material a
reinforcement
a relatively high within walls [64].
strength and In lowrecent
[Link], multiple
Bamboo studies
can also behaveusedfoundas athat bamboo
scaffolding
can replace
material andsteel
as aasreinforcement
a reinforcing material
within walls in concrete
[64]. In [94].
recentThis could
years, greatlystudies
multiple benefithave
the
low-income housing market, especially in developing countries. Despite
found that bamboo can replace steel as a reinforcing material in concrete [94]. This could the limited actual
use of bamboo
greatly benefitas the
a structural
low-incomematerial in developed
housing market,countries, bamboo
especially has been established
in developing countries.
as a viable structure solution since the 2000s. In 2004, ISO 22157-1
Despite the limited actual use of bamboo as a structural material in developed and ISO 22157-2countries,
together
officially
bamboo introduced bamboo’sas
has been established application to structural
a viable structure design
solution worldwide
since the 2000s.[64]. The first
In 2004, ISO
building
22157-1 andcodeISO for22157-2
bamboo’s application
together wasintroduced
officially introducedbamboo’s
in India in 1994, “13985:
application Specifi-
to structural
cation
designfor bamboo mat
worldwide [64].board for general
The first buildingpurposes,” followedapplication
code for bamboo’s by the Chinese was regulation
introduced
“GB/T 15780: Testing methods for physical and mechanical properties
in India in 1994, “13985: Specification for bamboo mat board for general purposes,” of bamboo” in 1995
and “GB/T 2690 Bamboo timber” in 2000 [64].
followed by the Chinese regulation “GB/T 15780: Testing methods for physical and
Moreover,
mechanical bambooofconstruction
properties bamboo” incan 1995 provide
and “GB/T an effective structural
2690 Bamboo seismic
timber” resisting
in 2000 [64].
[Link], bamboo construction can provide an effective structural seismicspeed
An earthquake’s force imposed on a structure depends on its mass and of
resisting
acceleration; with the sameforce
system. An earthquake’s acceleration,
imposed heavy construction
on a structure endures
depends on its a higher
mass and earthquake
speed of
force. Therefore, bamboo is an ideal material as it has a higher density
acceleration; with the same acceleration, heavy construction endures a higher earthquake yet is lighter than
timber, and thus it will be subjected to a smaller earthquake force due to its small mass [65].
force. Therefore, bamboo is an ideal material as it has a higher density yet is lighter than
Japan is known for using bamboo as a structural material in vernacular buildings. The
timber, and thus it will be subjected to a smaller earthquake force due to its small mass
2007 Peru earthquake prompted researchers to examine the earthquake-resistant value of
[65]. Japan is known for using bamboo as a structural material in vernacular buildings.
bamboo houses, and in 2012, the country passed bamboo legislation [65]. Furthermore,
The 2007 Peru earthquake prompted researchers to examine the earthquake-resistant
value of bamboo houses, and in 2012, the country passed bamboo legislation [65].
Furthermore, following the 2016 Ecuador earthquake, Ecuador published a building code
for bamboo construction in 2017.
In addition to its structural strength, bamboo is a sustainable material due to its rapid
Climate 2023, 11, 165 10 of 18

following the 2016 Ecuador earthquake, Ecuador published a building code for bamboo
construction in 2017.
In addition to its structural strength, bamboo is a sustainable material due to its rapid
growth rate. It has a shorter maturity cycle of around three to five years, compared to
commonly used softwood (e.g., pine) that take 25 to 30 years to mature. Bamboo can
produce 12 times more green building materials than wood [63]. Some researchers found a
bamboo forest can sequester 17 times as much carbon as that of a typical tree forest [66].
The carbon storage and sequestration rates for bamboo was found to be and 6–13 mg per
ha per year [67].
Other more advanced bamboo-based products have been invented and used for
commercial buildings in developed countries. For example, laminated bamboo has been
tested and used in structural beams [95], columns [96], and shear walls [97]. Their structural
strength is competitive with concrete and steel structures, with a much lower associated
embodied carbon.
Climate 2023, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 19
3.2. Secondary Natural Raw Materials
3.2.1. Straw Bale
Straw
structural bale is
strength is by-product
competitive with of grown
concreteplants
and steel with limited
structures, withuse; it is the
a much lowerdry plant materials
associated
or stalks leftembodied
in thecarbon.
field after the plants have matured and been harvested [68]. The earliest
straw constructions appeared in Africa as far back as the Paleolithic Period [68], and the
3.2. Secondary Natural Raw Materials
use of straw as a building material in vernacular architecture occurred in the Middle
3.2.1. Straw Bale
East [98] and China thousands of years ago, by early settlers in areas where trees were
Straw bale is by-product of grown plants with limited use; it is the dry plant materials
limited forinwood
or stalks left the fieldhouses
after the and
plantswhere sandyand
have matured soil made
been sod[68].
harvested houses impractical, and thus
The earliest
straw construction became the best, and probably, only solution.
straw constructions appeared in Africa as far back as the Paleolithic Period [68], and the
use ofStraw
straw as can come from
a building a variety
material of plants,
in vernacular such occurred
architecture as wheat, oats,
in the barley,
Middle East rye, rice, soybean,
[98] and
corn, andChina thousands
others. of years
It can ago, by early
be exposed or settlers
covered in areas where
by soil ortrees
limewere limited The bale’s shape,
stucco.
for wood houses and where sandy soil made sod houses impractical, and thus straw
dimension, and level of compression depended on the baler used, it was found the density
construction became the best, and probably, only solution.
of barley 3 3
Straw straw bales
can come range
from from of
a variety 54.6 kg/m
plants, suchtoas78.3 kg/m
wheat, oats,, while
barley, oat
rye,and
rice,wheat straw bales
range from 3 3
soybean, corn,81
andkg/m
others. to 106.3
It can kg/m or[71].
be exposed Research
covered indicated
by soil or lime stucco. the thermal
The bale’s conductivity of
shape, bales
straw dimension, and level
is lower thanofthat
compression depended
of concrete, brick, on and
the baler
[Link],Further,
it was found the
its specific heat capacity
density of barley straw bales range from 54.6 kg/m3 to 78.3 kg/m3, while oat and wheat
ranges between 1075 and 2000 J/(kg · K), which is close to that of conventional materials,
straw bales range from 81 kg/m3 to 106.3 kg/m3 [71]. Research indicated the thermal
which ranges between 1000 and 2500 J/(kg · K) [73]. Multiple
conductivity of straw bales is lower than that of concrete, brick, and wood. Further, its studies found straw bale to
be a good material for building high-performance exterior
specific heat capacity ranges between 1075 and 2000 J/(kg·K), which is close to that of walls, with its high thermal
property
conventional and good hygrothermal
materials, which ranges betweenperformance1000 and [73].
2500 J/(kg·K) [73]. Multiple
studiesIn vernacular buildings, straw bale was oftenhigh-performance
found straw bale to be a good material for building exterior
used as a load-bearing wall material
walls, with its high thermal property and good hygrothermal performance [73].
(referInto Figure 5a). For example, in North America, the “Nebraska
vernacular buildings, straw bale was often used as a load-bearing wall material
style” straw bale wall is
a(refer
typical load-bearing wall with sufficient structural strength
to Figure 5a). For example, in North America, the “Nebraska style” straw bale wall to bear the weight of the roof
and comprise
is a typical the insulation
load-bearing of the wall.
wall with sufficient On strength
structural the other hand,
to bear the modern-day
the weight of the straw bale
roof and comprise
construction the insulation
often uses bales of the wall. On the infill
as insulative other hand, the modern-day
that does not carrystraw structural load. The
bale construction often uses bales as insulative infill that does not carry structural load.
outer layers around a straw bale core are made of hardwood, plaster, or cement [71].
The outer layers around a straw bale core are made of hardwood, plaster, or cement [71].

Figure 5. (a) Straw bale load-bearing wall, and (b) cordwood wall construction (credit to Wikimedia
Figure 5. (a) Straw bale load-bearing wall, and (b) cordwood wall construction (credit to Wikime-
Commons).
dia Commons).
Using straw as an alternative material to wood has several environmental benefits.
First, straw is an annual renewable by-product of grain production. Using straw for
construction material can avoid the resources and energy required to produce
conventional modern building materials, such as insulation. Secondly, as a common
practice, straw will be disposed by burning in fields; using straw as construction material
can avoid carbon and particulates released from burning. Regarding the straw bale’s life
Climate 2023, 11, 165 11 of 18

Using straw as an alternative material to wood has several environmental benefits.

First, straw is an annual renewable by-product of grain production. Using straw for
construction material can avoid the resources and energy required to produce conventional
modern building materials, such as insulation. Secondly, as a common practice, straw will
be disposed by burning in fields; using straw as construction material can avoid carbon
and particulates released from burning. Regarding the straw bale’s life cycle assessment,
ref. [74] found an annual reduction of 1230 kgCO2 equivalent as compared to a conventional
insulated timber house.

3.2.2. Cordwood
Cordwood building is a construction type comprising a collection of building tech-
niques known by various names, such as cordwood, stackwood, and stovewood [78]. In
general, it is a masonry construction, in which cut-to-length pieces of raw wood, similar to
firewood, are used instead of bricks [80]. The small-dimension logs are placed with the cut
ends facing the interior and exterior of the building. Because the logs are set and bound by
masonry mortar, small and irregular shaped logs can be utilized, which leads to a highly
decorative appearance. Cordwood buildings can be traced back to one thousand years ago
in Germany [80], and the building type was also found in Scandinavia, Central Europe,
Eastern Canada, and the Northern United States at the end of the 19th century [77,99,100].
According to recorded history since 1850 to present, the use of cordwood construction
has appeared in different forms and for various purposes; for example, it was used in
barn buildings in Norway and in housing for people and cattle in Sweden and North
America [79].
Building a traditional cordwood wall is relatively simple and does not require expen-
sive tools or skilled labor. As illustrated in Figure 5b, the log ends are placed on a bed of wet
mortar, which can be done by a pair of hands. Cordwood construction is an exceptionally
low-cost building method due to the low-cost material and less-skilled labor requirement.
Further, the aesthetics of cordwood building can be appealing. Logs from 38 cm to 60 cm
long (long end) can be used to create thick walls, and thus the thickness of cordwood walls
varies from 38 cm up to 90 cm [79]. Thicker walls have higher thermal properties and
structural stability. Traditional cordwood walls have a greater thermal mass than modern
lightweight wood construction (wood stud frames). Therefore, cordwood walls can be
found in cold climate regions and seismic areas. In vernacular cordwood construction, clay,
cob, sawdust, straw, or other insulative materials were used as mortar. In some cases, even
pieces of cloth soaked in mud could be used to hold together the walls [79]. The mortar
used in modern cordwood buildings is usually made from a mixture of Portland cement
and lime, which has much higher embodied carbon.

4. Low-Carbon Design and Construction Techniques

4.1. Design for Disassembly
According to the United Nations, a circular economy works by extending products’
life spans “through improved design and servicing and relocating waste from the end of
the supply chain to the beginning” [2]. In the building and construction industry, besides
using more durable and recycled materials, an effective way to extend a building prod-
uct’s life span is to reuse building components from old buildings in new buildings. This
approach can be achieved through the concept of design for disassembly [101]. In some
cases, designing building components to be disassembled and reused in their second life
was associated with a decrease of up to 81% in embodied energy and 88% in embodied
carbon [101]. However, currently, design for disassembly is not widely practiced in the
building industry, mainly due to two issues of reusing building components. First, most
modern buildings are designed and constructed for one purpose only, and thus the build-
ings are not flexible and adaptable. In addition, the buildings were not designed in a way
that could be easily dissembled. Second, modern construction techniques and materials
make it extremely difficult to disassemble building components. For example, to recycle
Climate 2023, 11, 165 12 of 18

concrete, it must first be separated from steel, and heavy industrial equipment (with jaws
and a large impactor) is required to crush the large pieces of concrete, followed by screening
and separation. The whole process makes recycling and reusing concrete difficult and
expensive [102]. Therefore, almost all reinforced concrete will be demolished at the end of
the life cycle rather than disassembled.
The design process and designers can also play a role in hindering the design for disas-
sembly [103]. In extreme cases, a previous study found that the designer was responsible for
almost all the obstacles in the recycling process [104]. To overcome the obstacles, designers
need to relearn the skills of design for disassembly. Great examples and lessons can be
learned from traditional and vernacular architecture. Design for disassembly has long
existed in traditional timber construction worldwide. In Europe, the scarcity of suitable
timber in the Middle Ages led to the regular reuse of major structural members from one
building to the next [105]. Similar practices can be found in Asian countries. Traditional
Chinese and Japanese wood houses were constructed using primary and secondary frames,
with the secondary timber members easily disassembled and remodeled with few tools
since there were normally no nails or screws used for assembly. In Japanese, the term
kaitai shūri means “repair by disassembly.” This means that traditional wooden buildings
are entirely or sometimes partially disassembled and reassembled with new materials,
where the primary and secondary structures can be repaired and maintained [106]. This
disassembling and reassembling tradition has prevailed through history and has been
applied to all building types [106]. As for other natural materials and construction types,
such as adobe walls without plaster, it is possible to disassemble adobe blocks for use in
other buildings, but to the author’s knowledge, no studies or practices on this exist.

4.2. Design for Modularity and Tectonics

Modular building is a construction technique whereby building modules are pre-
made off-site and then shipped to the construction site for installation. Modular design
and prefabrication may seem like a modern invention that minimizes construction waste
and improve efficiency [107], but it has existed for hundreds of years in traditional and
vernacular buildings and is often coupled with design for disassembly.
In the West, the earliest prefabricated timber cottages existed in 1624; they were
made in Britain and exported to Australia and other countries [108]. In the East, one of
the earliest construction textbooks and manuals on timber structures was published in
1103 BC, during the Song Dynasty, called Ying Zao Fa Shi, which means “construction
method.” The wood module was defined based on its size, then buildings with different
functions and hierarchies were built with different modular elements. For example, the
first-level wood module has a width of 9 “cun” (~29.97 cm) and a thickness of 6 “cun”
(~19.98 cm); thus, this module is suitable for constructing the largest temple with nine to
eleven bays. The eighth-level module has a width of 4 “cun” (~13.32 cm) and a thickness
of 3 “cun” (~9.99 cm), which can only be used to construct small landscape buildings or
utility buildings [109]. The largest module is twice the size of the smallest module, and the
other six levels follow gradient series rules that reflect important modular principles. Just
like a modern prefabricated modular house, those individual modules of different sizes
could be made off-site and transported on-site for installation.
Another example is the bamboo house found in Southeast Asia, where the locally
available materials influence the size of the built form. For example, in Chittagong Hill
Tracts, Bangladesh, bamboo is used for the floor, columns, and exterior walls (refer to
Figure 4), so the housing module is based on the available bamboo material. The lashing
method is commonly used for its flexibility, which allows for disassembling the bamboo,
adding additional bamboo, and even quickly rebuilding the entire house [110]. Together,
the material’s structural properties and construction method determine the size of the
built form. For a bamboo building, a living space can be around 23 m2 , compared to a
wood space that can be up to 60 m2 . Therefore, there is strong modularity and tectonic
Climate 2023, 11, 165 13 of 18

logic established in vernacular architecture, which differs from the notion that vernacular
architecture is organic, random, or even irrational [111].

5. Discussion
In light of the widespread promotion of wood as the ultimate solution for sustainable
building, it is crucial to reconsider the approach of adopting a single solution universally.
Instead, we should explore alternative low-carbon options that leverage locally available
materials and construction knowledge, offering low cost, practicality, flexibility, and adapt-
ability. This review paper provides valuable insights into the contribution of low-carbon
materials and construction techniques in vernacular buildings. It encourages a reevaluation
of the high-tech approach in the building industry and advocates for the utilization of
vernacular knowledge to achieve true sustainability. As listed in Table 2, previous stud-
ies have conducted assessments to quantify the embodied carbon (column 4), structural
strength (columns 5 and 6), and thermal performance (column 7) of many materials used
in vernacular buildings. The included publication covered a wide-range of materials and
techniques worldwide, from which we synergized three categorical sustainable areas of
knowledge that can be learned from vernacular architecture: (1) sustainability requires con-
textual factors, (2) design must highlight reuse with low tech, and (3) culturally appropriate
solutions should be chosen.
First, sustainability requires plural but contextual approaches to global challenges.
With 194 countries and the EU joining the Paris Agreement, addressing climate change is a
global commitment through political will. In line with this commitment, buildings must be
constructed to be carbon neutral by limiting both operational carbon (i.e., emissions because
of heating, cooling, lighting, and power) and embodied carbon (i.e., construction-related
emissions). The Western solution to this shift toward low-embodied carbon buildings has
been mass timber construction, in which the advantages of wood—regarding renewability
and atmospheric carbon sequestration—are utilized through products (e.g., cross-laminated
or glue-laminated timber) to reduce a building’s carbon footprint. While timber buildings
are promoted at a global scale, the extent to which the present and future demands of
the construction industry can distress the available forests is less clear [112]. In fact,
the largest forest areas allowing for the sustainable sourcing of wood building materials
exist in developed countries, notably in North America and Europe, while the largest
building stock growth happens in developing countries—Asia and Africa—some of which
are experiencing significant population growth [11–13]. Accordingly, the application of
timber buildings as a one size-fits-all approach to all building types may not be a solution
for many developing regions. Research has shown that approaches such as sustainable
forest management may not be effective in all countries and can even be associated with
higher deforestation in some low-income economies, mainly due to the increased foreign
investment and international timber demand. In these cases, locally available low-carbon
materials found in vernacular architectural practices can be creatively used in modern
construction. Straw bale, for example, is a renewable waste byproduct of grain production
of crops [68] and has been traditionally used in vernacular buildings in Africa [68], the
Middle East [98], and Asia [98]. Recent scientific research indicates it has superior thermal
properties as compared with concrete, brick, and wood [74]. Using natural materials in
construction based on their local availability can reduce embodied carbon and emission
particulates released from burning [74].
Second, design for low tech, low impact versus high tech, high impact. Nobel laure-
ate ecological economist Herman Daly defined sustainable development as development
without growth (i.e., qualitative improvement without a quantitative increase). The devel-
opment must occur within the biosphere boundaries and be treated with extraordinary
caution and by considering its rebound effects, especially in growing economies where the
technological advancement has a higher potential to yield an increased resource consump-
tion through growth rates, intensive use, and other factors. In a low-tech and low-process
approach to construction, designing for a longer life span, spatial and structural reusability,
Climate 2023, 11, 165 14 of 18

and adaptiveness to different conditions can enhance the quality of architecture and limit
demand for new construction. This approach is the opposite of most modern practices in
which buildings are designed and constructed for short life spans, serve specific purposes
(e.g., office building), and are fully demolished once their life span is complete. Part of the
problem is construction techniques and materials that make it extremely difficult to disas-
semble building components. Design for reuse, especially for disassembly, has long existed
in traditional construction worldwide. In Europe, the scarcity of suitable timber in the
Middle Ages led to the regular reuse of major structural members in buildings [105]. Tradi-
tional Chinese and Japanese wood houses were constructed using primary and secondary
frames, with the secondary timber members conveniently disassembled and remodeled
with few tools. In Japanese, the term kaitai shūri means “repair by disassembly,” meaning
that traditional wooden buildings were entirely or sometimes partially disassembled and
reassembled with repairs, where the primary and secondary structures could be repaired
and maintained to extend the building service life [106].
Third, design with a cultural foundation. Cultural relevance has been at the core
of architecture for centuries, created through a process of trial and error by civilizations
worldwide. Accordingly, vernacular and traditional architecture has continuously evolved
to generate features and forms that adapt to the living cultures and collective wisdom of its
community. An example is Yakhchaal—ancient Persian ice houses—which relied on their
dome-shaped forms, underground structure, and the thermal mass provided by thick adobe
to provide a local architectural solution to a practical and climatic challenge (i.e., the need
to store ice for summertime use in hot and arid conditions). Until the collapse of cultural
frontiers in the twentieth century, these distinctive local forms dominated architecture in
different societies, and their aesthetics were the co-product of technological availability,
environmental responsiveness, practicality, and cultural relevance.
While interest in vernacular forms of knowledge has generated interest for disciplines
that include agriculture, health care, and education, in the built environment, it is mostly
confined to heritage preservation or nostalgic references to the past. Consequently, the
meaningful application of nonmodern forms of knowledge in sustainable building practices
is almost nonexistent. What this paper hopes to provide is a systemic review to recognize
the complicated, contextual, plural, dynamic nature of sustainable solutions, as opposed to
the technology-reliant and optimization-oriented approach highlighted by most existing
sustainable design practice and movements.

6. Conclusions
The paper identifies and explains eight bio-based low-carbon materials and two
techniques. Compared to conventional modern building materials, vernacular materials
and techniques exhibit superiority in several aspects. Firstly, vernacular lessons are derived
from the holistic and dynamic relationship between human habitats and the ecosystem,
enabling them to adapt to changing environments. Secondly, local climate and natural
resources serve as the foundation for vernacular construction techniques, shaping the
conception of architectural organisms. Thirdly, low transportation requirements contribute
to lower carbon emissions. Additionally, modular design and construction reduce carbon
emissions during installation and deconstruction while improving the recyclability of
building components. Most vernacular materials are organic, biodegradable, renewable,
and have the capacity to store carbon. Lastly, the utilization of local craftsmanship and
labor positively impacts the local economy, particularly in low-income communities.
By highlighting the advantages, constraints, and the next steps for integration, the
paper offers a comprehensive perspective on the potential of vernacular construction in
mitigating environmental impact and fostering resilient communities. However, there is
limited quantitative data on sod block, cob, and strawbale compared to other materials.
This represents a research gap for future studies. According to available data, compared to
wood, other materials all have lower embodied carbon. Some materials, such as rammed
earth and adobe wall, have comparable structural strength and thermal performance. Taken
Climate 2023, 11, 165 15 of 18

together, this suggests that local materials other than wood can be a promising alternative
for sustainable buildings.
Moving forward, integrating vernacular building knowledge into climate resilience
plans involves two key components. Firstly, there is a need to raise public awareness and
understanding of the benefits of vernacular architecture and other materials (rather than
wood), leading to the development of new strategies for true sustainable living. The second
component entails conducting scientific-based testing and experiments that can bridge the
gap between vernacular knowledge and modern practices. This process will ultimately
lead to optimized solutions that accommodate the economic development demands of local
communities while preserving the local environment. It is essential to acknowledge that
wood or mass timber construction alone will not be a singular solution applicable to all
countries, regions, and communities.

Funding: This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement: There is no data used in this project.
Conflicts of Interest: The author declares no conflict of interest.

References
1. Ruiz, L.A.L.; Ramón, X.R.; Domingo, S.G. The circular economy in the construction and demolition waste sector–A review and an
integrative model approach. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 248, 119238.
2. Munaro, M.R.; Tavares, S.F.; Bragança, L. Towards circular and more sustainable buildings: A systematic literature review on the
circular economy in the built environment. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 260, 121134.
3. Gallego-Schmid, A.; Chen, H.-M.; Sharmina, M.; Mendoza, J.M.F. Links between circular economy and climate change mitigation
in the built environment. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 260, 121115.
4. Fernandes, J.; Peixoto, M.; Mateus, R.; Gervásio, H. Life cycle analysis of environmental impacts of earthen materials in the
Portuguese context: Rammed earth and compressed earth blocks. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 241, 118286.
5. Pierzchalski, M. Straw Bale Building as a Low-Tech Solution: A Case Study in Northern Poland. Sustainability 2022, 14, 16511.
6. Snep, R.P.; Voeten, J.G.; Mol, G.; Van Hattum, T. Nature based solutions for urban resilience: A distinction between no-tech,
low-tech and high-tech solutions. Front. Environ. Sci. 2020, 8, 599060.
7. Sommese, F.; Ausiello, G. From Nature to Architecture for Low Tech Solutions: Biomimetic Principles for Climate-Adaptive Building
Envelope; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2022; pp. 429–438.
8. Curran, M.A. Biobased Materials. In Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2010;
ISBN 978-0-471-23896-6.
9. Pomponi, F.; Hart, J.; Arehart, J.H.; D’Amico, B. Buildings as a Global Carbon Sink? A Reality Check on Feasibility Limits. One
Earth 2020, 3, 157–161.
10. Lal, R.; Negassa, W.; Lorenz, K. Carbon sequestration in soil. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2015, 15, 79–86.
11. Göswein, V.; Arehart, J.; Pittau, F.; Pomponi, F.; Lamb, S.; Zea Escamilla, E.; Freire, F.; Silvestre, J.D.; Habert, G. Wood in buildings:
The right answer to the wrong question. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2022, 1078, 012067.
12. Churkina, G.; Organschi, A.; Reyer, C.P.O.; Ruff, A.; Vinke, K.; Liu, Z.; Reck, B.K.; Graedel, T.E.; Schellnhuber, H.J. Buildings as a
global carbon sink. Nat. Sustain. 2020, 3, 269–276.
13. Hamiltton, I.; Rapf, O.; Kockat, D.; Zuhaib, D. 2021 Global Status Report for Buildings and Construction. Available online:
[Link] (accessed on 10 June 2023).
14. Pei, S.; van de Lindt, J.W.; Popovski, M.; Berman, J.W.; Dolan, J.D.; Ricles, J.; Sause, R.; Blomgren, H.; Rammer, D.R. Cross-
Laminated Timber for Seismic Regions: Progress and Challenges for Research and Implementation. J. Struct. Eng. 2016,
142, E2514001.
15. Oliver, P. Built to Meet Needs: Cultural Issues in Vernacular Architecture; Routledge: Oxfordshire, UK, 2007; ISBN 978-0-08-047630-8.
16. Chandel, S.; Sharma, V.; Marwah, B.M. Review of energy efficient features in vernacular architecture for improving indoor
thermal comfort conditions. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 65, 459–477.
17. Dabaieh, M.; Maguid, D.; El-Mahdy, D. Circularity in the New Gravity—Re-Thinking Vernacular Architecture and Circularity.
Sustainability 2021, 14, 328.
18. Fernandes, J.E.P.; Mateus, R.; Bragança, L. The Potential of Vernacular Materials to the Sustainable Building Design. In Vernacular
Heritage and Earthen Architecture: Contributions for Sustainable Development; Taylor & Francis Group: London, UK, 2014.
19. Getty Research Institute International Style (Modern European Architecture Style). Available online: [Link]
vow/AATFullDisplay?find=international+style&logic=AND&note=&page=1&subjectid=300021472 (accessed on 10 June 2023).
20. Mota, L.; Mateus, R.; Bragança, L. The Contribution of the Maintenance Phase for the Environmental Life-Cycle Impacts of a
Residential Building. In Proceedings of the BSA 2012—1st International Conference on Sustainable Building, Porto, Portugal,
23–25 May 2012; Green Lines Institute for Sustainable Development: Porto, Portugal, 2012.
Climate 2023, 11, 165 16 of 18

21. Fatorić, S.; Seekamp, E. Are cultural heritage and resources threatened by climate change? A systematic literature review. Clim.
Chang. 2017, 142, 227–254.
22. Jigyasu, R. Does Cultural Heritage Make More Resilient Cities? Available online: [Link]
heritage-make-more-resilient-cities/ (accessed on 22 November 2022).
23. Ashtari, M.N. Facing Climate Change: The Importance of Protecting Earthen Heritage Traditional Knowledge. In Proceedings of
the 2020 ICOMOS 6 ISCs Joint Meeting Proceedings, Taiwan, China, 17 October–17 October 2020; Volume 68.
24. Zhai, Z.J.; Previtali, J.M. Ancient vernacular architecture: Characteristics categorization and energy performance evaluation.
Energy Build. 2010, 42, 357–365.
25. De Dear, R.; Brager, G.S. Developing an adaptive model of thermal comfort and preference. ASHRAE Trans. 1998, 104, 145.
26. Aktürk, G.; Fluck, H. Vernacular Heritage as a Response to Climate: Lessons for Future Climate Resilience from Rize, Turkey.
Land 2022, 11, 276.
27. Milgram, P.; Kishino, F. A taxonomy of mixed reality visual displays. IEICE Trans. Inf. Syst. 1994, 77, 1321–1329.
28. Starostin, S.A. The Evolution of the Human Language Project. Available online: [Link]
(accessed on 24 November 2022).
29. Previtali, J.M.; Zhai, Z. A taxonomy of vernacular architecture. Energy Build. 2016, 110, 71–78.
30. Qu, J.-J.; Cheng, G.-D.; Zhang, K.-C.; Wang, J.-C.; Zu, R.-P.; Fang, H.-Y. An experimental study of the mechanisms of freeze/thaw
and wind erosion of ancient adobe buildings in northwest China. Bull. Eng. Geol. Environ. 2007, 66, 153–159.
31. Silveira, D.; Varum, H.; Costa, A.; Martins, T.; Pereira, H.; Almeida, J. Mechanical properties of adobe bricks in ancient
constructions. Constr. Build. Mater. 2012, 28, 36–44.
32. Bahobail, M.A. The mud additives and their effect on thermal conductivity of adobe bricks. JES J. Eng. Sci. 2012, 40, 21–34.
33. Morris, J.; Blier, S.P. Butabu: Adobe Architecture of West Africa; Princeton Architectural Press: New York, NY, USA, 2004;
ISBN 1-56898-413-8.
34. El-Derby, A.; Elyamani, A. The adobe barrel vaulted structures in ancient Egypt: A study of two case studies for conservation
purposes. Mediterr. Archaeol. Archaeom. 2016, 16, 295–315.
35. Tunali, S. Adobe Structures As Our Cultural Heritage and Their Features. Eur. Sci. J. 2015.
36. Uğuryol, M.; Kulakoğlu, F. A preliminary study for the characterization of Kültepe’s adobe soils with the purpose of providing
data for conservation and archaeology. J. Cult. Herit. 2013, 14, e117–e124.
37. Ramakrishnan, S.; Loganayagan, S.; Kowshika, G.; Ramprakash, C.; Aruneshwaran, M. Adobe blocks reinforced with natural
fibres: A review. Mater. Today Proc. 2021, 45, 6493–6499.
38. Bouguerra, A.; Ledhem, A.; de Barquin, F.; Dheilly, R.M.; Quéneudec, M. Effect of microstructure on the mechanical and thermal
properties of lightweight concrete prepared from clay, cement, and wood aggregates. Cem. Concr. Res. 1998, 28, 1179–1190.
39. Webster, F.A.; Tolles, E.L. Earthquake Damage to Historic and Older Adobe Buildings during the 1994 Northridge, Cali-
fornia Earthquake. In Proceedings of the 12th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Auckland, New Zealand,
30 January–4 February 2000.
40. Obonyo, E.; Exelbirt, J.; Baskaran, M. Durability of Compressed Earth Bricks: Assessing Erosion Resistance Using the Modified
Spray Testing. Sustainability 2010, 2, 3639–3649.
41. Fabbri, A.; Morel, J.-C.; Aubert, J.-E.; Bui, Q.-B.; Gallipoli, D.; Reddy, B. Testing and Characterisation of Earth-based Building
Materials and Elements. Rilem State Art Rep. 2022, 35, 296.
42. Tang, X.; Shen, S.; Su, X. From rammed earth to stone wall: Chronological insight into the settlement change of the Lower
Xiajiadian culture. PLoS ONE 2022, 17, e0273161.
43. Hall, M.; Allinson, D. Assessing the effects of soil grading on the moisture content-dependent thermal conductivity of stabilised
rammed earth materials. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2009, 29, 740–747.
44. Azil, A.; Le Guern, M.; Touati, K.; Sebaibi, N.; Boutouil, M.; Streiff, F.; Goodhew, S.; Gomina, M. Earth construction: Field
variabilities and laboratory reproducibility. Constr. Build. Mater. 2022, 314, 125591.
45. Ben-Alon, L.; Loftness, V.; Harries, K.A.; DiPietro, G.; Hameen, E.C. Cradle to site Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of natural vs
conventional building materials: A case study on cob earthen material. Build. Environ. 2019, 160, 106150.
46. Miccoli, L.; Müller, U.; Fontana, P. Mechanical behaviour of earthen materials: A comparison between earth block masonry,
rammed earth and cob. Constr. Build. Mater. 2014, 61, 327–339.
47. Hamard, E.; Cazacliu, B.; Razakamanantsoa, A.; Morel, J.-C. Cob, a vernacular earth construction process in the context of modern
sustainable building. Build. Environ. 2016, 106, 103–119.
48. Fodde, E. Traditional earthen building techniques in Central Asia. Int. J. Archit. Herit. 2009, 3, 145–168.
49. Akinwumi, I.I.; Awoyera, P.O.; Bello, O.O. Indigenous Earth Building Construction Technology in Ota, Nigeria. Indian J. Tradit.
Knowl. 2015, 14, 206–212.
50. Niroumand, H.; Zain, M.F.M.; Jamil, M. Various Types of Earth Buildings. Procedia-Soc. Behav. Sci. 2013, 89, 226–230.
51. Keefe, L. Earth Building: Methods and Materials, Repair and Conservation; Taylor & Francis: London, UK; New York, NY, USA, 2005;
ISBN 978-0-415-32322-2.
52. Quagliarini, E.; Stazi, A.; Pasqualini, E.; Fratalocchi, E. Cob Construction in Italy: Some Lessons from the Past. Sustainability 2010,
2, 3291–3308.
53. Forster, A.M.; Medero, G.M.; Morton, T.; Buckman, J. Traditional cob wall: Response to flooding. Struct. Surv. 2008, 26, 302–321.
Climate 2023, 11, 165 17 of 18

54. Panneton, D.; Sod Houses. The Canadian Encyclopedia. Available online: [Link]
sod-houses (accessed on 12 July 2022).
55. Bateman, S.; Turner, K.; Bateman, I. Socio-Economic Impact of the Change in the Quality of Thatching Reed; University of East Anglia:
Norwich, UK, 1990.
56. Dabaieh, M.; Sakr, M. Building with Reeds: Revitalizing a Building Tradition for Low Carbon Building Practice. In Proceedings of
the International Conference CIAV+ ICTC, Jeju Island, Republic of Korea, 28–30 October 2015; pp. 72–88.
57. Kimura, K.; Yamazaki, K. Passive Cooling Performance of Thatched Roofs in Traditional Japanese Vernacular Houses. In Passive
and Low Energy Alternatives I; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1982; pp. 3-1–3-7. ISBN 978-0-08-029405-6.
58. Juwono, I.L.; Susanto, D. The Reeds Performance Study on Traditional Architecture as Building Material in Wae Rebo Village.
E3S Web Conf. 2018, 67, 04015.
59. Manandhar, R.; Kim, J.-H.; Kim, J.-T. Environmental, social and economic sustainability of bamboo and bamboo-based construc-
tion materials in buildings. J. Asian Archit. Build. Eng. 2019, 18, 49–59.
60. Agyekum, K.; Kissi, E.; Danku, J.C. Vengala. Sci. Afr. 2020, 8, e00424.
61. Vengala, J.; Mohanthy, B.; Raghunath, S. Seismic Performance of Bamboo Housing–An overview. In Proceedings of the World
Bamboo Congress 2015, Damyang, Republic of Korea, 17–22 September 2015; Volume 1, pp. 389–407.
62. Sassu, M.; De Falco, A.; Giresini, L.; Puppio, M. Structural Solutions for Low-Cost Bamboo Frames: Experimental Tests and
Constructive Assessments. Materials 2016, 9, 346.
63. Yadav, M.; Mathur, A. Bamboo as a sustainable material in the construction industry: An overview. Mater. Today Proc. 2021, 43,
2872–2876.
64. Amede, E.A.; Hailemariama, E.K.; Hailemariam, L.M.; Nuramo, D.A. A Review of Codes and Standards for Bamboo Structural
Design. Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2021, 2021, 1–9.
65. Kyakula, M.; Gombya, I. Suitability of Bamboo for Construction and Environmental Preservation. J. Civ. Eng. Res. Pract. 2008,
5, 43–51.
66. Disén, K.; Clouston, P.L. Building with bamboo: A review of culm connection technology. J. Green Build. 2013, 8, 83–93.
67. Nath, A.J.; Lal, R.; Das, A.K. Ethnopedology and soil properties in bamboo (Bambusa sp.) based agroforestry system in North East
India. CATENA 2015, 135, 92–99.
68. Onyegiri, I.; Ugochukwu, I.B. Traditional building materials as a sustainable resource and material for low cost housing in
Nigeria: Advantages, challenges and the way forward. Int. J. Res. Chem. Metall. Civ. Eng. 2016, 3, 247–252.
69. Ejiga, O.; Paul, O.; Cordelia, O. Sustainability in Traditional African Architecture: A Springboard for Sustainable Urban Cities. In
Proceedings of the Sustainable Futures: Architecture and Urbanism in the Global South, Kampala, Uganda, 27–30 June 2012;
pp. 27–30. Available online: [Link] (accessed on 10 June 2023).
70. Kubba, S. Green Building Materials and Products. In Handbook of Green Building Design and Construction; Butterworth-Heinemann:
Oxford, UK, 2017. [CrossRef]
71. Tlaiji, G.; Biwole, P.; Ouldboukhitine, S.; Pennec, F. A Mini-Review on Straw Bale Construction. Energies 2022, 15, 7859.
72. Goodhew, S.; Griffiths, R. Sustainable earth walls to meet the building regulations. Energy Build. 2005, 37, 451–459.
73. Marques, B.; Tadeu, A.; Almeida, J.; António, J.; de Brito, J. Characterisation of sustainable building walls made from rice straw
bales. J. Build. Eng. 2020, 28, 101041.
74. Alcorn, A.; Donn, M. Life Cycle Potential of Strawbale and Timber for Carbon Sequestration in House Construction. In Proceedings
of the 2nd International Conference on Sustainable Construction Materials and Technologies, Ancona, Italy, 28–30 June 2010;
pp. 28–30.
75. D’Alessandro, F.; Bianchi, F.; Baldinelli, G.; Rotili, A.; Schiavoni, S. Straw bale constructions: Laboratory, in field and numerical
assessment of energy and environmental performance. J. Build. Eng. 2017, 11, 56–68.
76. Mouterde, R.; Morel, J.C.; Martinet, V.; Sallet, F. The mechanical performance of cordwood. Biosyst. Eng. 2011, 108, 237–243.
77. Tishler, W.H. Stovewood construction in the Upper Midwest and Canada: A regional vernacular architectural tradition. Perspect.
Vernac. Archit. 1982, 1, 125–136.
78. Roy, R. Cordwood Building: The State of the Art; New Society Publishers: Gabriola Island, BC, Canada, 2003.
79. Hagman, O. A Technology in Permanent Transition: 200 Years of Cordwood Building with Consumers as Producers. Icon 2012,
18, 142–156.
80. Magwood, C. Essential Hempcrete Construction: The Complete Step-by-Step Guide; New Society Publishers: Gabriola, BC, Canada,
2016; ISBN 0-86571-819-9.
81. Thomas, S.C.; Martin, A.R. Carbon content of tree tissues: A synthesis. Forests 2012, 3, 332–352.
82. Ávila, F.; Puertas, E.; Gallego, R. Characterization of the mechanical and physical properties of unstabilized rammed earth: A
review. Constr. Build. Mater. 2021, 270, 121435.
83. Welsch, R.L. Sod Construction on the Plains. Pioneer Am. 1969, 1, 13–17.
84. Christoforou, E.; Kylili, A.; Fokaides, P.A.; Ioannou, I. Cradle to site Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of adobe bricks. J. Clean. Prod.
2016, 112, 443–452.
85. Esteves, A.; Ganem, C.; Fernández, E.; Mitchell, J. Thermal Insulating Material for Low-Income Housing. In Proceedings of the
20th Conference on passive and Low Energy Architecture, Santiago, Chile, 9–12 November 2003.
86. Pervaiz, M.; Sain, M.M. Carbon storage potential in natural fiber composites. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2003, 39, 325–340.
Climate 2023, 11, 165 18 of 18

87. Shah, D.U.; Bock, M.C.D.; Mulligan, H.; Ramage, M.H. Thermal conductivity of engineered bamboo composites. J. Mater. Sci.
2016, 51, 2991–3002.
88. Guine, R.d.P.F.; dos Reis Correia, P.M. Engineering Aspects of Cereal and Cereal-Based Products; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA,
2013; ISBN 1-4398-8702-0.
89. Brics, A.; Serdjuks, D.; Gravit, M.; Buka-Vaivade, K.; Goremikins, V.; Vatin, N.I.; Podkoritovs, A. The Behaviour of Load-Carrying
Members from Cordwood. Buildings 2022, 12, 1702.
90. Dick, K.; Chaput, L. Thermal Monitoring of Stackwall/Cordwood Walls in a Northern Temperate Climate. In Proceedings of the
Continental Cordwood Conference, Koksijde, Belgium, 4 January 2005.
91. Watson, L.; McCabe, K. La técnica constructiva del cob. Pasado, presente y futuro. Inf. Constr. 2011, 63, 59–70.
92. Saxton, R. Performance of cob as a building material. Struct. Eng. 1995, 73, 111–115.
93. Bigfoot Turf. How to Measure How Much Sod You Need and How to Install It. Available online: [Link]
how-to-measure-how-much-sod-you-need-and-how-to-install-it/#:~:text=Sod%20consists%20of%20grass%20and,golf%20
courses%2C%20and%20sports%20stadiums (accessed on 5 January 2023).
94. Rahim, N.L.; Ibrahim, N.M.; Salehuddin, S.; Mohammed, S.A.; Othman, M.Z. Investigation of bamboo as concrete reinforcement
in the construction for low-cost housing industry. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2020, 476, 012058.
95. Sinha, A.; Way, D.; Mlasko, S. Structural Performance of Glued Laminated Bamboo Beams. J. Struct. Eng. 2014, 140, 04013021.
96. Li, H.; Su, J.; Xiong, Z.; Ashraf, M.; Corbi, I.; Corbi, O. Evaluation on the Ultimate Bearing Capacity for Laminated Bamboo Lumber
Columns under Eccentric Compression; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2020; Volume 28, pp. 1572–1579.
97. Varela, S.; Correal, J.; Yamin, L.; Ramirez, F. Cyclic performance of glued laminated Guadua bamboo-sheathed shear walls. J.
Struct. Eng. 2013, 139, 2028–2037.
98. Koh, C.H.A.; Kraniotis, D. A review of material properties and performance of straw bale as building material. Constr. Build.
Mater. 2020, 259, 120385.
99. Szewczyk, J. Cordwood Heritage. In Urban Heritage: Research, Interpretation, Education; Vilnius Gediminas Technical University
Publishing House Technika: Vilnius, Lithuania, 2007; pp. 120–128. [CrossRef]
100. The Center for Resourceful Building Technology. Indigenous Building Materials: An Overview; The Center for Resourceful Building
Technology: Gaithersburg, MD, USA, 1995.
101. Minunno, R.; O’Grady, T.; Morrison, G.M.; Gruner, R.L. Investigating the embodied energy and carbon of buildings: A systematic
literature review and meta-analysis of life cycle assessments. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 143, 110935.
102. Knaack, A.M.; Kurama, Y.C. Behavior of Reinforced Concrete Beams with Recycled Concrete Coarse Aggregates. J. Struct. Eng.
2015, 141, B4014009.
103. Bogue, R. Design for disassembly: A critical twenty-first century discipline. Assem. Autom. 2007, 27, 285–289.
104. Srour, I.; Chong, W.K.; Zhang, F. Sustainable recycling approach: An understanding of designers’ and contractors’ recycling
responsibilities throughout the life cycle of buildings in two US cities: Sustainable Recycling Approach. Sustain. Dev. 2012, 20,
350–360.
105. Peters, T.F. Building the Nineteenth Century; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1996; ISBN 978-0-262-16160-2.
106. Fukuda, M. “Repair by Disassembly” (Jap. Kaitai Shūri) in Japan. In Authenticity in Architectural Heritage Conservation; Springer:
Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2017; pp. 247–260.
107. Jang, H.; Ahn, Y.; Roh, S. Comparison of the Embodied Carbon Emissions and Direct Construction Costs for Modular and
Conventional Residential Buildings in South Korea. Buildings 2022, 12, 51.
108. Crowther, P. Historic Trends in Building Disassebly. In Proceedings of the Technology in Transition: Mastering the Impacts-
ACSA/CIB 1999 International Science and Technology Conference, Montreal, QC, Canada, 25–29 June 1999.
109. Zhang, S. Analysis of the Modified Materials System in Construction Methods. Southeast Univ. Press 1990, 20, 8–14.
110. Knapp, R.G. China’s Old Dwellings; University of Hawaii Press: Honolulu, HI, USA, 2000; ISBN 0-8248-2214-5.
111. Rashid, M.; Ara, D.R. Modernity in tradition: Reflections on building design and technology in the Asian vernacular. Front.
Archit. Res. 2015, 4, 46–55.
112. Bergdoll, B.; Dickerman, L. Bauhaus 1919–1933: Workshops for Modernity; The Museum of Modern Art: New York, NY, USA, 2009;
ISBN 0-87070-758-2.

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.