Social Sciences & Humanities Open 10 (2024) 100927

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Social Sciences & Humanities Open

journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com/journal/social-sciences-and-humanities-open

Regular Article

Awareness of building sustainability: A case of architectural students of

Kaduna state university
Aminat Idowu Ibiyeye *, Kasham J. Shamang , Gaiya Malachy
Department of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, Kaduna State University, Kaduna, Nigeria

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Sustainability has gained increasing significance within the field of architecture due to the growing urgency
Architectural students caused by climate change. However, despite its paramount importance, many architecture students often lack the
Building sustainability necessary preparation to fully integrate sustainable practices into their architectural projects. Consequently, this
Sustainability awareness
research aims to investigate the extent of sustainability awareness among architectural students in Nigeria and
Sustainability principles
how effectively they incorporate sustainability principles into their building design projects. To gather data from
the university’s architectural students, a questionnaire survey was conducted. The assessment of awareness
encompassed inquiries about the definition of sustainable building and its potential benefits, while the evaluation
of application focused on the utilization of building sustainability principles which are: energy usage, water
usage, material usage, occupants’ health and environmental impact. 169 filled questionnaires were collected and
analysed. The results indicated that higher-level students possess a good understanding of the term “building
sustainability” and are well-informed about the characteristics and benefits of sustainable buildings. Regarding
the application of sustainable principles, these students frequently incorporate natural ventilation and lighting
into their building designs as methods to save energy. However, they tend to overlook factors such as using
sustainable materials and generating renewable energy to reduce cooling loads. In terms of water and material
usage, most students rarely give consideration to these aspects in their designs. On the other hand, students
display a high level of awareness about how their building designs impact both the health of occupants and the
environment. The majority consistently take into account occupants’ health and environmental effects when
designing. The findings from this study highlight the importance of integrating sustainability into architectural
education early on, ensuring that graduates are well-prepared to incorporate sustainable practices into their
future architectural designs.

1. Introduction Cassidy (2003) defined a sustainable building as a building with high

Sustainable architecture is a field of study that has gained significant
attention in recent years due to the increasing awareness of environ­
mental issues. Building sustainability is a key issue in the construction
industry today, as the negative environmental and social impacts of
buildings become increasingly evident. The principles of building sus­
tainability encompass reducing energy consumption, conserving water,
enhancing indoor environmental quality, utilizing environmentally
friendly materials, and minimizing waste. Numerous studies have
demonstrated that adherence to these principles can yield substantial
environmental and economic advantages, alongside enhancing occu­
pant health and well-being. Sustainable buildings are consequently
designed and constructed based on these fundamental principles.
efficiency in the use of energy, water and materials, and reduced impacts
on the health and the environment through better siting, design, con­
struction, operation, maintenance and removal throughout its life cycle.
The need for sustainable buildings has become increasingly urgent as the
world faces climate change and other environmental challenges. Un­
fortunately, studies (Alsaati et al., 2020; Obia & Obot, 2016) have
revealed poor level of sustainability awareness amongst architects and
architectural students in developing countries including Nigeria. Obia
and Obot (2016) indicated that this could be a major reason why
contemporary Nigerian architecture seems to lack the ‘green’ touch, this
they considered a serious environmental and sustainability problem.
Mohamed and Elias-Ozkan (2019) argue that there is a clear defi­
ciency in teaching pedagogy and instructional tools for imparting

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: aminat.ibiyeye@kasu.edu.ng (A.I. Ibiyeye).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2024.100927
Received 4 January 2024; Received in revised form 12 April 2024; Accepted 23 April 2024
Available online 27 April 2024
2590-2911/© 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
nc/4.0/).
A.I. Ibiyeye et al.
knowledge and implementing sustainable architecture in university
students. Mohamed (2021) further stresses the need to adopt new
principles to enhance undergraduate architectural education, particu­
larly in integrating sustainability into design studios. Additionally, Ozer
et al. (2012) and Shari and Jaafar (2006) emphasize the importance of
introducing building sustainability concepts to students early on to
cultivate educated, skilled, and knowledgeable architects.
It is imperative to assess the level of awareness and knowledge of
building sustainability among university architecture students and
evaluate their application of sustainable principles in design projects.
This becomes crucial as the building industry requires graduates and
practitioners capable of addressing climate change challenges through
sustainable design, thus reducing the adverse environmental impact of
buildings. Thus, this research aims to investigate the extent of sustain­
ability awareness among architectural students in Nigeria and how
effectively they incorporate sustainability principles into their building
design projects.
2. Literature review
2.1. Building sustainability
Building sustainability encompasses the design, construction, and
operation of buildings with a reduced negative impact on the environ­
ment, aiming for increased energy efficiency, improved occupant health,
and greater comfort. Sustainable building practices employ various
strategies and technologies to minimize environmental footprints,
decrease energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions, conserve
natural resources, and enhance occupant well-being (Luanda et al.,
2021; Schiavon & Altomonte, 2018). The importance of building sus­
tainability is growing due to the heightened recognition of the envi­
ronmental and social impacts of the built environment.
2.2. Sustainable buildings
Sustainable buildings not only demonstrate environmental re­
sponsibility but also offer cost-effectiveness and improved health for
occupants. According to Akadiri et al. (2012) and Bainbridge (2004), an
ideal sustainable building project should have lower construction costs,
maintain a long lifespan with minimal maintenance, and biodegrade
completely when no longer in use. Consequently, building sustainability
is becoming a standard practice in the construction industry. Akadiri
et al. (2012) and Cassidy (2003) outline several key principles of
building sustainability commonly applied in sustainable building design
and construction:
1. Energy efficiency: Reducing energy consumption by using efficient
building systems, appliances, and lighting, and designing buildings
to maximize natural lighting and ventilation.
2. Water conservation: Conserving water resources by using low-flow
fixtures, capturing and reusing rainwater, and designing land­
scapes that require minimal irrigation.
3. Materials and resources: Using sustainable materials and minimizing
waste during construction and demolition, such as through recycling
and salvage.
4. Indoor environmental quality: Promoting occupant health and
wellbeing by designing buildings that provides good indoor air
quality, comfortable temperatures, and optimal lighting conditions.
5. Sustainable site planning: Designing buildings to minimize their
impact on the environment and surrounding communities, such as
through green roofs, permeable surfaces, and preserving open
spaces.
6. Adaptability and resilience: Designing buildings that are adaptable
to changing needs and that can withstand natural disasters and other
environmental risks.
2
Social Sciences & Humanities Open 10 (2024) 100927
Many building codes and certification systems have been developed
to promote sustainable building practices. Sustainable building codes
and regulations, such as the International Energy Conservation Code
(IECC) and the International Green Construction Code (IGCC), provide a
minimum standard for sustainable building design and construction.
These codes and regulations typically focus on energy efficiency, water
conservation, and indoor environmental quality, and can be adopted by
governments to promote sustainable building practices (Braunholtz-­
Speight et al., 2020). Green building rating systems, such as Green Star
and CASBEE, provide a tool for assessing and benchmarking the sus­
tainability of buildings, and can be used by building owners and oper­
ators to improve the sustainability of their buildings. These systems
typically focus on energy efficiency, water conservation, and materials
and resources, and can also provide guidance on sustainable site plan­
ning and indoor environmental quality (Wang et al., 2019). Further­
more, Certification programs such as LEED, BREEAM, and WELL provide
a framework for assessing and certifying the sustainability of buildings
based on a range of criteria, including energy efficiency, water conser­
vation, indoor environmental quality, and materials and resources.
Numerous studies have demonstrated that buildings certified under
these programs can significantly reduce energy consumption and
greenhouse gas emissions while enhancing occupant health and well-
being (Schiavon & Altomonte, 2018). For instance, Sartori and
Hestnes (2007) discovered that sustainable buildings can achieve up to
an 80% reduction in energy consumption, alongside improvements in
indoor air quality that reduce the risk of sick building syndrome. Simi­
larly, Luanda et al. (2021) revealed that sustainable building practices
can cut water consumption by as much as 50% and play a role in miti­
gating the impact of climate change on water resources.
2.3. Role of education
The importance of education in fostering sustainability among ar­
chitecture students cannot be overstated, given their pivotal role in
shaping the future of sustainable building practices. Saifuddin et al.
(2019) highlighted that integrating sustainability into the architecture
curriculum significantly enhances students’ awareness and under­
standing of sustainable design principles. They recommended a
comprehensive integration of sustainability across all architecture
courses to ensure a holistic grasp of sustainable design.
Similarly, Alshuwaikhat and Abubakar (2008) identified a notice­
able gap between the theoretical knowledge and practical application of
sustainable design among architecture students. Their study proposed
incorporating sustainable design principles into the curriculum and of­
fering practical training to bridge this gap. Okon et al. (2021) echoed
this sentiment, suggesting the full integration of sustainable architecture
into Nigerian school curricula and retraining of lecturers to align with
global standards. This is particularly why Mohamed (2021)’s study
focused on integrating environmental, social, and economic sustain­
ability principles into architectural design studios, aiming to train future
architects in sustainable building design. The study, conducted at Izmir
Institute of Technology, Turkey, utilized innovative pedagogical ap­
proaches and assessment tools to evaluate students’ integration of sus­
tainable design elements. The results showed a commendable 68% level
of sustainable element integration, affirming the effectiveness of the
pedagogical approach in fostering sustainable design practices among
students.
In another light, Mennatullah et al. (2024) conducted a study on the
integration of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in architecture
education, focusing on challenges and potential advancements. The
research highlighted a lack of a standardized global framework for
integrating SDGs into architectural curricula. Unlike other mandates,
the United Nations did not explicitly require the inclusion of SDGs in
education across disciplines, leading to varying levels of autonomy
among institutions and educators in this aspect.
A.I. Ibiyeye et al.
2.4. Level of students’ awareness on building sustainability
Numerous studies have explored the awareness of sustainable design
among architecture students. Sariyildiz and Yildirim (2020), studying
students in a Turkish university, and Taboada et al. (2020), focusing on
Spanish architecture students, both noted a moderate level of awareness
regarding sustainable design principles. The Turkish students showed
greater awareness of energy efficiency and renewable energy sources,
while Spanish students were more knowledgeable about energy effi­
ciency and sustainable materials, with limited understanding of water
conservation and waste reduction.
In contrast, Al-Sallal and Alalouch (2018) found that architecture
students in Kuwait exhibited a high level of awareness regarding sus­
tainable design, particularly in energy efficiency and sustainable mate­
rials, albeit with less understanding of water conservation and waste
reduction. Similarly, Alsaati et al. (2020) surveyed students in the
Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia and found that while many had heard
of sustainability through education, their knowledge, especially
regarding recycling and energy conservation, was limited. The study
recommended mandatory sustainability courses in educational pro­
grams to enhance students’ understanding of sustainability principles.
Michael et al. (2020) conducted a preliminary study on sustainable
development concept awareness among students in higher education,
focusing on sustainable practices and their impact on the environment.
The study, conducted at a Malaysian public university in Kota Samar­
ahan, surveyed students’ awareness, attitudes, and actions regarding
sustainable development. Results indicated that nearly half of the stu­
dents had limited knowledge of sustainable development, although final
year students exhibited a higher level of awareness compared to
first-year students. The study recommended embedding sustainability
aspects into universities’ core mission and management structure to
enhance sustainability education. In Pakistan, Malik et al. (2019)
investigated students’ sustainability awareness in relation to their
competence development in technology education. The study also
explored the extent of sustainability integration across the technology
education curriculum.
Ozer et al. (2012) conducted a comparative study among Architec­
ture students by introducing the concept of building sustainability into
the Department’s Basic Design II course during the 2011–2012 spring
semester. The students were divided into two groups: the test group and
the control group. Both groups were assigned the same house design
project to work on throughout the semester. Near the end of the se­
mester, after the students had been working on their design projects for
several weeks, the test group underwent a three-week special seminar
focusing on sustainability issues and ecological awareness. This seminar
covered passive concepts such as material usage, building orientation,
rainwater harvesting, energy conservation, and the use of alternative
energy sources. At the end of the semester, both groups’ projects were
reviewed, and the students were evaluated through a survey question­
naire. The results showed an improvement in the design outcomes of the
test group, with sustainable building elements and practices being
highly prioritized in their designs. The findings indicated that increased
awareness of sustainability practices helped enhance the students’
design skills and boosted their confidence in creating environmentally
and user-friendly buildings.
In Nigeria, Zaki et al. (2016) conducted a survey on students of the
department of building construction from Nuhu Bamalli Polytecnic,
Zaria, Kaduna. The study was conducted with the objective of investi­
gating the students’ awareness of sustainable construction concepts. The
results of the survey shows that a high percentage of the sample popu­
lation have heard about sustainable construction but just a few have an
understanding of its concepts. Hence, the assertion is that integrating
sustainable or environmentally friendly design classes into the curricu­
lum for construction students is crucial. This should emphasize the
importance for industry stakeholders to incorporate these principles into
their own designs and construction methods, given that students often
3
Social Sciences & Humanities Open 10 (2024) 100927
emulate what they learn during their training. The suggestion is to
revamp construction-related courses to include a focus on sustainability
and for government authorities to create policies mandating that con­
struction industry stakeholders implement sustainable practices.
Obia and Obot (2016) studied the level of awareness of Nigerian
architects on the issue of sustainable green architecture; using the
South-South Region of Nigeria as a case study. After a questionnaire
survey of the selected respondents, results indicated that all the re­
spondents agreed that application of green architectural principle is very
crucial in architectural practice in Nigeria. However, few architects
work with clients who are knowledgeable about sustainability practices
in architecture. The study concluded from its results that majority of
Nigerian architects are yet to practice sustainable green architecture.
Similarly, on Nigerian architects, Umar et al. (2021) investigated
Architects’ awareness and knowledge of Sustainable building materials.
Structure interview was carried out on 18 registered licensed practicing
architects in Minna, Nigeria. The results revealed that despite the global
attention on sustainability, low level of awareness and knowledge of
sustainable building materials is still recorded among Architects. The
study proposed updating the state’s building regulations, emphasizing
their consistent implementation in architectural designs. This would
lead architects to naturally enhance their understanding of sustainable
building materials. However, if practicing architects in Nigeria lack
proficiency in this area, what implications does this hold for architecture
students?
The studies mentioned either focused on practicing architects in
Nigeria (Oluwaseun et al., 2023; Omopariola et al., 2022; Allu-Kangkum
et al., 2021; Umar et al., 2021; Anthony & Isaac-Laughter, 2019; Obia &
Obot, 2016) or on university students outside the field of architecture
(Zaki et al., 2016). There is limited documentation regarding the
awareness of architecture students in Nigeria regarding building sus­
tainability, apart from two studies conducted by Allu (2016) and Ashelo
(2014) at the University of Jos, Nigeria. These studies explored the
perceptions of postgraduate and undergraduate students regarding the
importance of sustainable architectural education and the future pros­
pects of sustainable architectural practices in Nigeria. The research
utilized questionnaire surveys to gather relevant data, revealing that a
majority of students are familiar with sustainability concepts. However,
sustainability is not currently a part of the department’s curriculum. The
aim of these studies was to advocate for sustainable design practices and
to encourage the application of sustainable architectural skills through
training for future practitioners.
2.5. Research aim and objectives
With the growing rate of global interest on sustainability awareness
in the building sector, students of architecture at all levels are expected
to be equipped with this critical knowledge and awareness and as such
put this knowledge in use in their building design projects. Thus, it is
expected that an architectural student at the final level in the university
display some level of knowledge and awareness on the issue of building
sustainability. It is therefore important to study the level of awareness/
knowledge of building sustainability amongst university architectural
students and at the same time reveal their rate of application of sus­
tainable building principles in their design projects.
As one of the prominent institutions providing architectural educa­
tion in Nigeria, Kaduna State University (KASU) has a responsibility to
ensure that its students receive appropriate training that aligns with the
evolving demands of the design profession. It is thus imperative of the
university to prioritize delivering relevant and up-to-date education to
its students in response to the changing needs of the architectural field.
Therefore, it is crucial to ensure that the education and training of up­
coming professionals in the field of architecture are appropriately
guided, encompassing comprehensive processes that would inform
sustainable practices in the architectural profession. In KASU “Intro­
duction to sustainable architecture” as a course was introduced into the
A.I. Ibiyeye et al.
year 4 curriculum at the department of architecture, students are taken
through what sustainable architecture entails, sustainable design prin­
ciples and other relevant topics. Although this course is taken during the
second semester of the final year, students’ final design projects still
failed to reflex their knowledge of building sustainability. It is important
to note here that the course was introduced late into the curriculum and
students are not expected to quickly integrate and apply what was just
learnt in the final project topic/design that has been conceived a se­
mester earlier.
This study thus aims to answer that following research questions
1. What is the level of awareness and understanding of sustainable
building practices among architecture students in Nigeria?
2. To what extent do architecture students incorporate sustainable
building principles in their design projects?
To ensure coherence and precision of the study, these research
questions were answered under the following research objectives:
1. To assess the awareness and knowledge of building sustainability
among architecture students in Kaduna State University.
2. To evaluate the frequency and depth of integration of sustainable
building principles in the design projects of architecture students.
3. To propose recommendations and strategies to enhance the inte­
gration of sustainable building principles into architecture education
and practice in Nigeria.
3. Methods
To fulfil the study’s objectives and to answer the stated questions, a
questionnaire survey was conducted to obtain information from stu­
dents on their level of awareness on building sustainability and their
application of sustainable principles in their design projects. Question­
naire survey is popularly used in awareness survey (Alsaati et al., 2020;
Michael et al., 2020; Malik et al., 2019; Obia & Obot, 2016; Zaki et al.,
2016) and it enables researchers cover an extensive amount of infor­
mation on a variety of topics across a large number of people in a limited
amount of time. Online questionnaire was adopted using Google forms.
Online survey is convenient, cost-effective. flexible, timely, online
questionnaires may have higher response rates compared to traditional
methods and can prevent participants from providing inconsistent or
incomplete responses; this can improve the accuracy and completeness
of the data collected (Dewaele, 2018). Furthermore, Google forms are
free and easy to use and navigate.
Questionnaire from similar studies which was based on the Sus­
tainability Assessment Questionnaire (Alsaati et al., 2020; Sariyildiz &
Yildirim, 2020; Taboada et al., 2020; Allu, 2016) were analysed and
modified in order to remove unrelated questions and to optimize its
validity for the questions addressed in this study.
The questionnaire is divided into three parts which are: Demographic
characteristics, level of knowledge/awareness of sustainable building, and
application of sustainable building principles.
3.1. Part one: Demographic characteristics
Questions under this part were to obtain information about re­
spondents’ demographic characteristics such as level (year),gender, age,
respondents were further ask about the first time they heard the term
‘sustainable building’ and from which source they heard the term from?
This particular information was needed to understand later in the result
analysis how their awareness is affected by any of these factors.
3.2. Part two: level of knowledge/awareness of sustainable building
This part asks questions that reveal the respondents’ level of
awareness building sustainability. Respondents were asked how much
4
Social Sciences & Humanities Open 10 (2024) 100927
they agree or disagree with statements about what sustainable building
is and what sustainable buildings do. Responses were graded using a 5
point likert scale (strongly disagree, disagree, indifferent, agree, and
strongly agree). Respondents were further asked if they live in a building
that they believe is sustainable and how best do they think is the most
effective way of delivering information on sustainable building to the
general public. Response from this part is targeted at fulfilling the first
research objective, which is: To assess the awareness and knowledge of
building sustainability among architecture students in Kaduna State
University and other selected universities in Nigeria.
3.3. Part three: application of sustainable building principles
This part asks respondents to state their rate/frequency of applica­
tion of the sustainable building principles in their building design pro­
jects. The questions from this part was developed around the principles
of building sustainability which are reducing energy consumption (en­
ergy usage), conserving water (water usage), improving indoor envi­
ronmental quality (occupants’ health), using environmentally friendly
materials (material usage), and minimizing waste (environmental
impact) as discussed by Akadiri et al. (2012) and Cassidy (2003). Re­
spondents were asked to rate their frequency of employing these prin­
ciples in their building design projects. Responses were graded using a 5
point likert scale (Never, rarely, sometimes, often, and always.).
Response from this part is directed at fulfilling the second research
objective, which is: To evaluate the frequency and depth of integration
of sustainable building principles in the design projects of architecture
students.
3.3.1. Energy usage
This section highlights some design considerations for low energy
usage in buildings, thus the following questions were asked: How often
do you consider sustainable energy usage in your design in form of:
1. Natural lighting from windows, courtyards, skylights, atrium, light
shelves etc. (to reduce reliance on artificial lighting)
2. Natural ventilation from operable windows, doors, courtyards etc.(to
reduce reliance on air conditioning)
3. Reduce heating and cooling load (through the use of building ma­
terials with high thermal mass)
4. Introduction of renewable energy generation (solar panels, wind
turbines, heat pumps).
3.3.2. Water usage
This section highlights some design considerations for alternative
water source for efficient water usage in buildings. Questions in this
section are; how often do you consider water management in your
design in form of:
1. Waste water treatment (treatment of used water for reuse)
2. Rain water harvesting (storage of rain water for domestic use)
through appropriate roof design.
3.3.3. Material usage
This section highlights some design considerations for the usage of
environmentally friendly building materials in building construction
and building material management to avoid/reduce waste, thus the
following questions were asked: How often do you consider building
material management in your design through the use/specification of:
1. Recycled construction materials.
2. Durable and locally sourced materials
3. Non-toxic building materials and finishes.
4. Modular design to reduce material wastage.
A.I. Ibiyeye et al.
3.3.4. Occupants’ health
This section highlights some design considerations for improving
indoor environmental quality for occupants’ wellbeing, where the
following questions were asked: How often do you consider occupants’
wellbeing in your design through:
1. Reduce glare by introducing sun shading devices.
2. Considering indoor air quality (through the use/specification of non-
toxic finishes and materials).
3. Reduction of heat island effect (through less hard landscape, intro­
duction of vegetation and greenery, or green roofs).
4. Occupants’ thermal comfort (using cross ventilation through natural
ventilation).
5. Reduced noise pollution (introduction buffer zones, planting of tress
and proper zoning of spaces).
3.3.5. Environmental impact
This last section highlights some design considerations/factors
considered in reducing the negative impact of a building on its envi­
ronment; where the following questions were asked: How often do you
consider the environment/eco system in your design through:
1. Proper siting and orientation of your building design
2. Site selection criteria and consideration
3. Proper zoning of space
4. Proper waste management and disposal
Prior to the main survey, a preliminary study was conducted on some
group of students, this was done to test the survey questionnaire against
errors and to determine its reliability. For the primary data collection
(main survey), architectural students from year two to year four (200,
300 and 400 level) were involved while year one students were
excluded. This is because at year one, an architectural student is not yet
fully integrated into the department (they majorly offer courses from
sciences and few core architectural courses). Students were briefed on
the purpose of the survey; they were then taken through each question in
the survey and how to appropriately answer them. All these were done
before the link to the questionnaire was sent to each class whatsapp
platform. Each class level has their whatsapp platform where necessary
information is dissipated to the entire class because every member of the
class is an active member of the platform.
The survey was carried out at the end of the 2021/2022 academic
section when all level courses have been completed and all design pro­
jects have been done and submitted/presented. At this period students
are waiting to move to the next academic level. The study collected the
total number of architectural students at each level as the population
size (Table 1) from the department to estimate the sample size. Utilizing
an online sample size calculator highly regarded by researchers, it was
determined that a sample size of 163 or more is necessary to achieve a
99% confidence level with a margin of error of ±5%.
At the end of the survey, a total of 169 (76.47% of total number of
architectural students) responses were realized from students of 200,
300 and 400 levels (Table 1). The data from the survey questionnaire
were analysed using SPSS software version 22 and excel spreadsheet.
Relevant statistical analysis was carried out to fulfill the study’s
Table 1
Total number of architecture students at Kaduna State University for 2021/2022
academic section.
Level Total number of Total number of Percentage
students response response
200 110 84 76.36 %
300 55 40 72.72%
400 50 45 90%
Total 215 169 78.60%
5
Social Sciences & Humanities Open 10 (2024) 100927
objectives. These analyses include necessary descriptive analysis such as
frequency distributions and cross-tabulation.
4. Results and discussion
4.1. Demographic characteristics
The students’ information was investigated to analyse their de­
mographic characteristics of a total of 169 respondents from all the three
students’ levels. Fig. 1 represents the levels the students belong to while
Table 2 represents their gender.
Fig. 1 shows that a sample size of 84 (49.7%), 40 (23.7%), and 45
(26.6%) respondents represented 200 level, 300 level, and 400 level
respectively. Table 2 on the other hand shows the
Respondents’ gender, it can be seen that males represents the larger
population (89.9%). Furthermore, when respondents were asked when
was the first time they heard about the term ‘sustainable building’,
majority (72.8%) indicated that they first heard the word during their
‘university years’ (Table 3). This is understandable since they are
architectural students and the word ‘sustainable building’ might have
come up in one or two of their core architecture courses.
Interestingly, a significant percentage (19.5%) of respondents has
never heard of the word ‘sustainable building’. A further analysis using
cross tabulation (Table 4) revealed that all the students that have never
heard of the word ‘sustainable building’ are actually students from year
two (200 level). Thirty three (33) students from a total of eighty four
(84) 200 level students have never heard of the word ‘sustainable
building’, this is understandable because at this level (200 level) stu­
dents are just being introduced fully to courses specifically about ar­
chitecture. All the other students from higher levels/years (300 and 400
levels) are familiar with word ‘sustainable building’, this is similar to
Michael et al. (2020) study where it was observed that final year stu­
dents display a higher level of awareness of sustainability compared to
the other students.
Table 5 further shows that of all the 136 respondents that have heard
of the word ‘sustainable building’, 103 (75.7%) of them heard the word
from school lectures. This is in line with Alsaati et al. (2020) and Zaki
et al. (2016) where findings revealed that a large proportion of the
students that were studied had heard of the term “sustainability”
through educational sources.
This demographic information basically revealed that majority of the
respondents are familiar the word ‘sustainable building’ yet a large
percentage of 200 level students have never heard of the word before.
Those that are familiar with the word ‘sustainable building’ get to know
about it during their university and secondary school days and majorly
from school lectures. This is more reason why sustainability issues
should be introduced to architecture students earlier during their stu­
dentship as suggested by Okon et al. (2021), Allu (2016), Ashelo (2014),
Ozer et al. (2012) and Shari and Jaafar (2006).
4.2. Level of knowledge/awareness of sustainable building
Respondents were asked to agree or disagree to some statements
explaining what a sustainable building is and what a sustainable
building can do. Respondents were to respond on a scale of 1–5 (strongly
disagree to strongly agree). Strongly agree and agree were binned to
become ‘agree’ so also strongly disagree and disagree was also binned to
become ‘disagree’. This was done so that the presentation of results will
not be cumbersome. Thus for the final presentation three scales (‘agree’,
‘indifferent’, and ‘disagree’) is shown Figs. 2 and 3.
In Fig. 2, Majority of the respondents (59.2%) disagree with the
statement that a sustainable building is just like any other building. To
say a sustainable building is like any other building is to undermine its
significance and the values it adds to the environment and humans’ life.
Some of which are: minimises energy consumption while also providing
better indoor air quality and reducing the risk of sick building syndrome
A.I. Ibiyeye et al. Social Sciences & Humanities Open 10 (2024) 100927

Fig. 1. Respondents’ academic Level/Year (N = 169).

Table 2 Table 5
Students’ gender. Which source did you heard the word ‘sustainable building’ from (n = 136)?
Frequency Percentage (%) Frequency Percentage (%)

Male 152 89.9 Books/articles 2 1.5

Female 17 10.1 Friends and family 3 2.2
Total 169 100 Internet/Google search 11 8.1
News 3 2.2
School lectures 103 75.7
Social media 12 8.8
Table 3 TV and movies 2 1.5
First time the term ‘sustainable building’ was heard (N = 169). Total 136 100

Frequency Percentage (%)

Never heard of it 33 19.5 pollution (70.4%), and protects the environment (69.2). It is obvious
Secondary school years 13 7.7 from the responds shown in Figs. 2 and 3 that the students are well
University years 123 72.8
aware of what a sustainable building is and what it can do. This result is
Primary school years 0 0
At home 0 0 in contrast with the result from Alsaati et al. (2020) and Zaki et al.
Total 169 100 (2016) where findings revealed that although a large proportion of the
participants are familiar with the term “sustainability” their knowledge
of it is limited and just a few have an understanding of its concepts.
Table 4 Table 6 shows respondents’ response to if they believe they are living
Cross tabulation of students’ level and their knowledge of sustainable building in a building that can be referred to as sustainable. 56.2% responded
(N = 169). “No”, although 26.6% believe that the building they live in is sustain­
able. Furthermore, the students believe that internet and schools are the
200 level 300 level 400 level
most effective medium of educating the general public about sustainable
Never heard of it 33 0 0
buildings (Table 7).
Secondary school years 7 2 4
University years 44 38 41
Primary school years 0 0 0
At home 0 0 0 4.3. Application of sustainable building principles in design projects
Total 84 40 45
Figs. 4–8 shows the rate/frequency of application of sustainable
building principles amongst the students. Fig. 4 shows responses to
(Sartori and Hestnes (2007). Although, majority agrees that a sustain­ energy usage, it reveals that students mostly apply natural lighting and
able building should cost less to build (47.3%) and maintain (51.5%) a natural ventilation and their building design projects compared to
large percentage still disagree. And majority agrees to the facts to the reduction of cooling load and renewable energy generation. This is in
fact that a sustainable building is energy efficient and reduces negative contrast to Sariyildiz and Yildirim (2020); Taboada et al. (2020) where
impact on occupants’ health and environment. students are mostly aware of energy efficiency and the use of renewable
In Fig. 3 majority of the respondents agrees to the facts that sus­ energy sources.
tainable buildings helps improve the indoor space (71.6%), provides In this study, it is evident that students are aware of the importance
better ventilation and lighting (68.6%), helps save construction mate­ of energy efficiency. However, they tend to prioritize the simplest and
rials (55.0%), saves water (53.3%), saves electricity (62.7%), reduces most cost-effective method of achieving energy efficiency in buildings,

6
A.I. Ibiyeye et al. Social Sciences & Humanities Open 10 (2024) 100927

Fig. 2. Respondents’ response to what a sustainable building is.

Fig. 3. Respondents’ response to what a sustainable building can do.

which is by ensuring sufficient operable windows. This preference aligns

Table 6
with the common practice in Nigeria, where buildings are often
Do you live in a building that can be referred to as a sustainable building?
designed to rely heavily on natural ventilation and lighting, given the
Frequency Percentage (%) challenges posed by inadequate electricity supply in the country.
I don’t know 29 17.2 Fig. 5 illustrates responses regarding ‘Water usage,’ revealing that a
No 95 56.2 small percentage of students consistently prioritize waste water treat­
Yes 45 26.6
ments (18.3%) and rainwater harvesting (17.8%) as methods to
Total 169 100
conserve and reuse water in their building design projects. This finding
is surprising given Nigeria’s abundant rainfall and the relatively
straightforward and cost-effective nature of integrating rainwater
Table 7
collection from rooftops compared to other surfaces. It appears that
Most effective medium of educating the public about sustainable building.
students may overlook this important function of roofs, focusing more
Frequency Percentage (%) on their weather protection role. Alternatively, this oversight could stem
Billboards/banners 7 4.1 from limited knowledge of water conservation, as indicated in the re­
Internet 55 32.5 sults of studies by Taboada et al. (2020) and Al-Sallal & Alalouch (2018).
Schools 56 33.1
Furthermore, designing a waste water treatment plant for each project
Seminars/workshop/conferences 25 14.8
TV/radio 26 15.4
could be challenging for students, and recommending such a plant for
Total 169 100 every individual building may not be economically feasible.
Fig. 6 shows responses to “Material usage” in building design. It is
clear from Fig. 6 that majority of the students hardly always consider
sustainable building material usage in their building design projects.

7
A.I. Ibiyeye et al. Social Sciences & Humanities Open 10 (2024) 100927

Fig. 4. Sustainable energy usage.

Fig. 5. Sustainable water usage.

Fig. 6. Sustainable building material usage.

8
A.I. Ibiyeye et al.
Fig. 7. Impact of building design on occupants’ health.
Fig. 8. Impact of building design on the environment.
Quite a few percentage of students always consider recycled materials
(12.4%), locally sourced materials (24.3%), non-toxic materials and
finishes (26.6%) and modular design (25.%) in their building design
projects. The students may not fully grasp the impact that building
materials can have on both occupant health and the environment.
Furthermore, they may not be aware of the advantages of incorporating
locally sourced sustainable building materials. It is essential to
encourage students to consider using locally sourced materials in their
designs. Not only are these materials readily available and easily
accessible, but they are also cost-effective and contribute to sustain­
ability efforts.
It is evident in Figs. 7 and 8 that students are conscious of how their
building design can affect the occupants’ health and the impact the
building design can also have on the environment. With regards to the
building design’s impact on occupants’ health, quite a number of stu­
dents made efforts to always consider glare reduction (42.0%), indoor
air quality (39.6%), reduction of heat island effect (45.6%), thermal
9
Social Sciences & Humanities Open 10 (2024) 100927
comfort (54.4%) and noise pollution (49.1) in their building design
projects.
Similarly, 45.0% of students always consider the proper siting and
orientation of their building design, 47.3% always put into consider­
ation the appropriate site selection criteria, 56.2% are always conscious
of properly zoning their functional spaces accordingly and 46.7% always
consider proper waste management disposal from their building sites
(Fig. 8). This is an indication that the students have the best interest of
the building occupants and the environment at heart.
4.4. Recommendations and strategies to enhance the integration of
sustainable building principles into architecture education and practice in
Nigeria
The findings clearly indicate that integrating sustainable building
principles into the architecture curriculum earlier would have signifi­
cantly improved students’ understanding and application of these
A.I. Ibiyeye et al.
principles in their designs. Achieving a transition towards a sustainable
built environment in Nigeria requires a fundamental overhaul of
architectural education. Given the intricate nature of both architecture
and sustainability; architects’ pivotal role in the construction industry
gives them the power to influence other professions within their sphere.
To enhance the integration of sustainable building principles into ar­
chitecture education and practice in Nigeria, the following recommen­
dations are crucial.
1. Adoption of experiential learning approaches
To promote sustainable architecture effectively, architectural edu­
cators and professionals should adopt experiential learning approaches,
utilize appropriate methodologies and tools, and continuously expand
the knowledge base of sustainability through research and practice, as
advocated by Michael (2012) ’s two-level programs. These programs
encompass theoretical and practical courses focused on sustainable
design, interdisciplinary studies, and addressing real-world environ­
mental challenges related to water and energy systems. This underscores
the need for revising architectural education curricula to bridge the gap
between academia and professional practice, enhancing students’
practical skills through initiatives like the Student Industrial Work
Experience Scheme (SIWES).
2. Modification in architectural education accreditation requirements
and curriculum
Accreditation requirements and criteria for architectural education
should be updated to incorporate sustainable building education, prac­
tice and implementation. The accreditation bodies such as the Nigeria
University Commission (NUC) and the Architects Registration Council of
Nigeria (ARCON) should enforce the incorporation in the early years of a
student’s enrollment. This will inevitably help integrate sustainable
building concepts early into the architectural curricula across in­
stitutions in the country. Hendawy et al. (2024) proposed the integra­
tion of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in architectural
education. This approach aims to deepen students’ comprehension of
the interconnectedness among various sustainability objectives. By
doing so, students can cultivate a comprehensive understanding of
sustainable development within the architectural domain. This holistic
perspective empowers students with a versatile knowledge base and skill
set, enabling them to tackle intricate challenges effectively.
3. Government and Professional organizations’ intervention
Governments and university governing boards should promote sus­
tainable education by prioritizing energy-efficient buildings (EEBs) and
green buildings (GBs). Ibukun (2018) argues that Nigerian students are
lacking in information, exposure, examples, and mentorship in the area
of sustainable design, invention, and innovation. Thus, emphasizing the
design of EEBs and GBs will greatly benefit the learning experience and
architectural mindset of our students. In addition, schools of architec­
ture should be well funded and equipped with adequate facilities,
knowledge, materials and equipment that would ease the early adoption
and implementation of sustainable building principles into the curric­
ulum and practical projects.
5. Conclusions
This study has drawn on questionnaire survey undertaken with 169
architecture students of Kaduna state university. This study was carried
out with the aim of studying the extent of sustainability awareness
among architectural students in Nigeria and how effectively they
incorporate sustainability principles into their building design projects
while asking the following questions: 1. What is the level of awareness
and understanding of sustainable building practices among architecture
10
Social Sciences & Humanities Open 10 (2024) 100927
students in Nigeria? 2. To what extent do architecture students incor­
porate sustainable building principles in their design projects?
The results revealed that majority of the students from the lower
level have never heard the term “building sustainability”. But, the senior
level students are familiar with the word and in fact the students are well
aware of what a sustainable building is and what it can do. However,
with regards to the students’ application of sustainable principles in
their design, results indicates that students are highly aware of the
impact their building design has on occupants’ health and the envi­
ronment, and as such these factors are highly considered in their
building design projects.
In addition, students mostly consider natural ventilation and natural
lighting in their building design as means of minimizing energy usage
but majorly disregard the reduction of cooling load through the building
materials used and the generation of renewable energy. On the other
hand, students hardly put into consideration the application of alter­
native water source for efficient water usage in buildings. Similarly,
considerations for the usage of environmentally friendly building ma­
terials are low. Students hardly considered sustainable water usage and
sustainable building material usage in their design.
Overall this suggests that architecture students primarily focus on
natural ventilation and lighting for energy efficiency but overlook crit­
ical aspects such as reducing cooling load through building materials,
utilizing renewable energy sources, efficient water usage, and environ­
mentally friendly building materials. This partial understanding high­
lights the need for comprehensive sustainability education that
encompasses a broader range of strategies and technologies. By
addressing these gaps, students can develop a holistic approach to sus­
tainability, encompassing energy efficiency, water conservation, and
environmentally responsible material choices in building design. In
conclusion, students’ understanding and application of sustainability
principles are essential for shaping a sustainable future in architecture.
Their knowledge, creativity, and commitment to sustainable design
practices not only influence the buildings they design but also contribute
to broader environmental, social, and economic sustainability goals,
making a positive impact on society and the planet.
6. Limitations
One limitation for this study could be related to the potential for
sample bias. Since this study focuses on architecture students in Kaduna
State University, the sample may not fully represent the diversity of
perspectives and experiences across all architecture students in Nigeria.
This could limit the generalizability of the findings and the applicability
of proposed recommendations to the broader context of architecture
education and practice in Nigeria.
Additional limitation could be the possible influence of external
factors on students’ integration of sustainable building principles in
design projects. These external factors may include constraints such as
budgetary limitations, limited access to sustainable materials or tech­
nologies, regulatory challenges etc. These limitations could influence
the extent to which these students are able to incorporate sustainable
principles into their designs, thereby affecting the depth and frequency
of integration observed in the study. Considering these external in­
fluences is important for a more nuanced understanding of the chal­
lenges and opportunities for enhancing sustainable practices in
architecture education and practice in Nigeria. It is recommended that
future research endeavors should explore sustainability education across
a broader range of institutions to enhance generalizability; the impact of
external influences on effective incorporation of sustainable principles
into students’ designs is also an aspect that needs investigating and
evaluation so as to contribute to a more comprehensive body of
knowledge in this area.
A.I. Ibiyeye et al.
Ethics
Voluntary consent was obtained from all participants before the
commencement of data collection and every precaution was taken to
protect the privacy of all participants and the confidentiality of their
personal information.
Funding
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding
agencies in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Aminat Idowu Ibiyeye: Writing – review & editing, Writing –
original draft, Visualization, Validation, Supervision, Software, Re­
sources, Methodology, Investigation, Formal analysis, Conceptualiza­
tion. Kasham J. Shamang: Writing – review & editing, Resources,
Methodology, Investigation, Conceptualization. Gaiya Malachy:
Writing – review & editing, Supervision, Resources, Methodology,
Investigation.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest in the writing of this
manuscript. It is therefore suitable for publication.
Acknowledgement
The authors acknowledge the contributions of all architectural stu­
dents of Kaduna state university.
References
Akadiri, P. O., Chinyio, E. A., & Olomolaiye, P. O. (2012). Design of a sustainable
building: A conceptual framework for implementing sustainability in the building
sector. Buildings, 2(2), 126–152. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings2020126
Al-Sallal, K. A., & Alalouch, C. (2018). Assessment of sustainable design knowledge of
architecture students in Kuwait. Journal of Cleaner Production, 175, 593–601.
Allu, E. (2016). Sustainable architectural education: Perceptions from university of Jos
post graduate students. In Proceedings of the Joint International Conference (JIC) on
21st century human habitat: Issues, sustainability and development (pp. 1211–1218).
UniversityPublications.net.
Allu-Kangkum, E. L. A., Katyen, A. M., & Chong, J. D. (2021). International sustainability
university education for architecture, engineering and construction (aec) courses: A
case for global classroom. Journal of Mechanical And Civil Engineering, 7(4), 1–9.
Alsaati, T., El-Nakla, S., & El-Nakla, D. (2020). Level of sustainability awareness among
university students in the Eastern province of Saudi Arabia. Sustainability, 12(8),
1–15. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU12083159
Alshuwaikhat, H. M., & Abubakar, I. (2008). An assessment of sustainability practices in
higher education institutions: Case study of the University of South Australia. Journal
of Cleaner Production, 16(16), 1848–1862.
Anthony, B. S., & Isaac-Laughter, O. (2019). Implementation of green design strategies by
architects in Southwest Nigeria. International Journal of Innovative Technology and
Exploring Engineering, 8(9), 431–438.
Ashelo, A. E. L. (2014). Sustainability and architectural education in the university of
Jos- Nigeria. In Proceedings of the international journal of arts & sciences (pp. 99–106).
UniversityPublications.net.
Bainbridge, D. A. (2004). Sustainable building as appropriate technology. In J. Kennedy
(Ed.), Building without borders: Sustainable construction for the global village (pp.
55–84). Gabriola Island, Canada: New Society Publishers.
Braunholtz-Speight, T., Heywood, C., & Taki, A. (2020). Building energy codes and
standards: A review of their role in achieving building sustainability. Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews, 130, Article 109941.
11
Social Sciences & Humanities Open 10 (2024) 100927
Cassidy, R. (2003). A report on the green building movement. Building design and
construction. November Web https://archive.epa.gov/greenbuilding/web/pdf/
bdcwhitepaperr2.pdf.
Dewaele, J. M. (2018). Online questionnaires. In A. Phakiti, P. De Costa, L. Plonsky, &
S. Starfield (Eds.), The palgrave handbook of applied linguistics research methodology
(pp. 269–286). London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-
59900-1_13.
Hendawy, M., Junaid, M., & Amin, A. (2024). Integrating sustainable development goals
into the architecture curriculum: Experiences and perspectives. City and Environment
Interactions, 21(2024), 1–11.
Ibukun, O. A. (2018). Energy efficient and green building designs: A tool for teaching
sustainable design principles in Nigerian schools of architecture. In 2018 AARCHES
national conference. Zaria, February 21-22.
Luanda, L., Emanuelly, T., Luciana, A., Marcelo, A., & Luna, S. (2021). Sustainability in
the construction industry: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 289.
Malik, M. N., Khan, H. H., Chofreh, A. G., Goni, F. A., Klemeš, J. J., & Alotaibi, Y. (2019).
Investigating students’ sustainability awareness and the curriculum of technology
education in Pakistan. Sustainability, 11(9), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/
su11092651
2012 Michael Adegbile. (2012). Nigerian architectural education in a sustainable age.
Sustainable Futures: Architecture and Urbanism in the Global South Kampala,
Uganda, 27 – 30 June 2012.
Michael, F. L., Sumilan, H., Bandar, N. F. A., Hamidi, H. A., Jonathan, V., & Nor, N. N. M.
(2020). Sustainable development concept awareness among students in higher
education: A preliminary study. Journal of Sustainability Science and Management, 15
(7), 113–122. https://doi.org/10.46754/jssm.2020.10.011
Mohamed, K. E. (2021). The implementation model of integrating the three
sustainability aspects into the undergraduate architectural design studio. Journal of
Green Building, 16(1), 217–238. https://doi.org/10.3992/JGB.16.1.217
Mohamed, K. E., & Elias-Ozkan, S. T. (2019). Incorporating sustainability principles into
architectural design education: Results of an experimental design studio. Journal of
Green Building, 14(3), 143–158.
Obia, A. E., & Obot, I. D. (2016). The awareness of sustainability principles in the
practice of architecture in the developing world: A survey of South-South Nigeria.
Journal of Sustainable Development, 9(6), 204. https://doi.org/10.5539/jsd.v9n6p204
Okon, I. U., Emmanuel, U., Patrick, N., & Ukpong, E. (2021). Sustainable architecture in
Nigeria; challenges and prospects. In Conference: 39th national conference of Nigerian
environmental society (pp. 13–26).
Oluwaseun, E. A., Saheed, A., Toriola-Coker, L., Adekunle, S. O., Hafiz, A., & Sambo, L. Z.
(2023). Sustainable construction practice in Nigeria: Barriers and strategies for
improvement. Built Environment Project and Asset Management, 13(14). https://doi.
org/10.1108/BEPAM-06-2022-0085
Omopariola, E. D., Olanrewaju, O. I., Albert, I., Oke, A. E., & Ibiyemi, S. B. (2022).
Sustainable construction in the Nigerian construction industry: Unsustainable
practices, barriers and strategies. Journal of Engineering, Design and Technology.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JEDT-11-2021-0639. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print.
Ozer, D. G., Satici, B., Turan, B. O., & Soygenis, M. (2012). Raising awareness for
sustainability in basic design. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, 165
(September), 349–360. https://doi.org/10.2495/ARC120311
Saifuddin, S. M., Rahman, I. A., & Othman, N. Z. (2019). Embedding sustainability in
architecture education: A case study of Malaysia. Journal of Cleaner Production, 211,
121–132.
Sariyildiz, S., & Yildirim, A. (2020). Architecture students’ awareness and attitudes
towards sustainable design. International Journal of Environmental & Science
Education, 15(7), 1–16.
Sartori, I., & Hestnes, A. G. (2007). Energy use in the life cycle of conventional and low-
energy buildings: A review article. Energy and Buildings, 39(3), 249–257.
Schiavon, S., & Altomonte, S. (2018). A review of the evidence linking green buildings
and health: Improvements in occupant health and cognitive function. Building and
Environment, 123, 240–245.
Shari, Z., & Jaafar, M. (2006). Towards a holistic sustainable architectural education in
Malaysia. In Alam CIPTA (Vol. 1, pp. 57–65). International Journal on Sustainable
Tropical Design Research & Practice, 1.
Taboada, J., Rodil, E., Delgado, J. M., & Alves, F. (2020). Sustainable architecture and
the role of the architect: A study of the perceptions of architecture students in Spain.
Sustainability, 12(2), 1–16.
Umar, I. A., Lembi, J. J., & Emechebe, L. C. (2021). Assessment of awareness of architects
on sustainable building materials in Minna, Nigeria. American Journal of Construction
and Building Materials, 22(X), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.xxx.xxxxxxxx.xx
Wang, Z., Zhao, X., & Ge, J. (2019). A review of green building rating systems in the
world. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 107, 284–295.
Zaki, B. M., Abubakar, I., Amina, A., Mayere, H. L., & Tanimu, M. (2016). A study on the
level of awareness of sustainability concepts in construction amongst students : The
Nuhu Bamalli polytechnic experience. Civil and Environmental Research, 8(5),
149–157.