IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i13p10005-d1178246.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of Modern Architecture Criteria in the Context of Sustainability and Architectural Approach; Modern Period in North Nicosia

Author

Listed:
  • Çağla Beyaz

    (Department of Interior Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, Near East University, Nicosia 99138, Turkey)

  • Çilen Erçin

    (Department of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, Near East University, Nicosia 99138, Turkey)

Abstract

Cyprus was affected by different civilizations throughout history. After the 1974 war on the island, both parts of the island were affected by social, economic, cultural, environmental, and political factors. It is known that, in 1960, the construction of buildings containing the criteria of the modern architectural period in the northern and southern parts of the island of Cyprus continued increasingly. Although the architectural approaches that emerged with the modern period have different trends, the basis of all of them is based on the criteria of modern architecture. The main purpose of this research is to examine the architectural criteria of Efruz Houses (Müdüroğlu Houses) built in the modern period in the Nicosia Kumsal region in the context of sustainability parameters and modern architectural approach. In the study, these houses will be examined in terms of social, cultural, environmental, and economic which are parameters of sustainability. In the methodological approach, theoretical, analytical, and practical approaches were followed. In the theoretical approach stage, modern architecture, modern architectural approaches, and sustainability issues are discussed. At the analytical approach stage, the current analysis of the modern period residences in the Kumsal/Nicosia region, which was determined as the subject of the study, was made. In the practical approach phase, data revealing the physical and environmental conditions of the selected buildings were collected. The collected data were evaluated over the modern period residences in the Kumsal region in the context of modern architectural approaches and sustainability parameters. In the findings section, which is the last stage of the study, modern period houses that change function and do not change function are evaluated in the context of modern architectural approaches and sustainability parameters, taking into account the criteria of modern architecture. The research and findings clearly observed that the ideal principles and approaches of the modern period are associated with the sustainability parameters that emerged in the modern period. In the study, the necessity of applying modern period approaches in sustainable designs emerges. In this context, modern architectural criteria should be integrated into today’s sustainable designs and applied in practice. It is targeted to contribute to the existing literature by revealing the importance and values of houses, sustainability parameters, and modern period approaches and criteria.

Suggested Citation

  • Çağla Beyaz & Çilen Erçin, 2023. "Evaluation of Modern Architecture Criteria in the Context of Sustainability and Architectural Approach; Modern Period in North Nicosia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-48, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:13:p:10005-:d:1178246
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/13/10005/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/13/10005/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anita Bakshi, 2014. "Urban Form and Memory Discourses: Spatial Practices in Contested Cities," Journal of Urban Design, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(2), pages 189-210, March.
    2. Elena Bernardi & Salvatore Carlucci & Cristina Cornaro & Rolf André Bohne, 2017. "An Analysis of the Most Adopted Rating Systems for Assessing the Environmental Impact of Buildings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-27, July.
    3. World Commission on Environment and Development,, 1987. "Our Common Future," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780192820808.
    4. Izabela Luiza Pop & Anca Borza & Anuța Buiga & Diana Ighian & Rita Toader, 2019. "Achieving Cultural Sustainability in Museums: A Step Toward Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-22, February.
    5. Ümran Duman & Buket Asilsoy, 2022. "Developing an Evidence-Based Framework of Universal Design in the Context of Sustainable Urban Planning in Northern Nicosia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-31, October.
    6. Efrat Eizenberg & Yosef Jabareen, 2017. "Social Sustainability: A New Conceptual Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-16, January.
    7. Katriina Soini & Joost Dessein, 2016. "Culture-Sustainability Relation: Towards a Conceptual Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-12, February.
    8. Feriha Urfalı Doğu & Lerzan Aras, 2019. "Measuring Social Sustainability with the Developed MCSA Model: Güzelyurt Case," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-20, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Siti Fatihah Salleh & Ahmad Abubakar Suleiman & Hanita Daud & Mahmod Othman & Rajalingam Sokkalingam & Karl Wagner, 2023. "Tropically Adapted Passive Building: A Descriptive-Analytical Approach Using Multiple Linear Regression and Probability Models to Predict Indoor Temperature," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-25, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jubril Olakitan Atanda & Ayşe Öztürk, 2020. "Social criteria of sustainable development in relation to green building assessment tools," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 61-87, January.
    2. Robert J. DiNapoli & Carl P. Lipo & Terry L. Hunt, 2021. "Triumph of the Commons: Sustainable Community Practices on Rapa Nui (Easter Island)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-23, November.
    3. Thi Huyen Le & Yoshinori Nakagawa & Yutaka Kobayashi, 2021. "Conditions under Which Rural-to-Urban Migration Enhances Social and Economic Sustainability of Home Communities: A Case Study in Vietnam," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-18, July.
    4. Małgorzata Ćwikła & Anna Góral & Ewa Bogacz-Wojtanowska & Magdalena Dudkiewicz, 2020. "Project-Based Work and Sustainable Development—A Comparative Case Study of Cultural Animation Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-24, August.
    5. Małgorzata Jasiulewicz-Kaczmarek & Katarzyna Antosz & Ryszard Wyczółkowski & Małgorzata Sławińska, 2022. "Integrated Approach for Safety Culture Factor Evaluation from a Sustainability Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-30, September.
    6. Judith Janker & Stefan Mann, 2020. "Understanding the social dimension of sustainability in agriculture: a critical review of sustainability assessment tools," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 1671-1691, March.
    7. Isabella M. Lami & Beatrice Mecca, 2020. "Assessing Social Sustainability for Achieving Sustainable Architecture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-21, December.
    8. Olivera Kostoska & Ljupco Kocarev, 2019. "A Novel ICT Framework for Sustainable Development Goals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-31, April.
    9. Gianluca Elia & Alessandro Margherita & Claudio Petti, 2020. "Building responses to sustainable development challenges: A multistakeholder collaboration framework and application to climate change," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(6), pages 2465-2478, September.
    10. Natalia Sánchez-Arrieta & Rafael A. González & Antonio Cañabate & Ferran Sabate, 2021. "Social Capital on Social Networking Sites: A Social Network Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-35, May.
    11. Nataša Rebernik & Marek Szajczyk & Alfonso Bahillo & Barbara Goličnik Marušić, 2020. "Measuring Disability Inclusion Performance in Cities Using Disability Inclusion Evaluation Tool (DIETool)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-25, February.
    12. Ali Ishag Adam Mohamed & Mustafa Omar Mohammed & Mohd Nizam Bin Baron, 2019. "Towards the Definition and Analysis of Social Component of Sustainable Development," International Journal of Asian Social Science, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 9(4), pages 318-326, April.
    13. Jinliu Chen & Haoqi Wang & Zhuo Yang & Pengcheng Li & Geng Ma & Xiaoxin Zhao, 2023. "Comparative Spatial Vitality Evaluation of Traditional Settlements Based on SUF: Taking Anren Ancient Town’s Urban Design as an Example," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-20, May.
    14. Ioannis Chatziioannou & Luis Alvarez-Icaza & Efthimios Bakogiannis & Charalampos Kyriakidis & Luis Chias-Becerril, 2020. "A Structural Analysis for the Categorization of the Negative Externalities of Transport and the Hierarchical Organization of Sustainable Mobility’s Strategies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-27, July.
    15. Lie Ma & Qiu Xie & Shiying Shi & Xiaosu Ye & Aifeng Zhao, 2017. "Regional Maldistribution of China’s Hospitals Based on Their Structural System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-18, June.
    16. Ieva Zemite & Ilona Kunda & Ilze Judrupa, 2022. "The Role of the Cultural and Creative Industries in Sustainable Development of Small Cities in Latvia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-22, July.
    17. Małgorzata Dzimińska & Justyna Fijałkowska & Łukasz Sułkowski, 2020. "A Conceptual Model Proposal: Universities as Culture Change Agents for Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-23, June.
    18. Elvi Chang & Stefan Sjöberg & Päivi Turunen & Komalsingh Rambaree, 2022. "Youth Empowerment for Sustainable Development: Exploring Ecosocial Work Discourses," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-27, March.
    19. Kagan Dogruyol & Zeeshan Aziz & Yusuf Arayici, 2018. "Eye of Sustainable Planning: A Conceptual Heritage-Led Urban Regeneration Planning Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-22, April.
    20. Agnieszka Wojewódzka-Wiewiórska & Anna Kłoczko-Gajewska & Piotr Sulewski, 2019. "Between the Social and Economic Dimensions of Sustainability in Rural Areas—In Search of Farmers’ Quality of Life," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-26, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:13:p:10005-:d:1178246. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.