This passage highlights an important issue in building design research, especially in university environments. I agree that factors like layout, color, spatial organization, and visual connection to the outside all play a key role in occupant well-being, not just IEQ alone. It is concerning that many studies focus only on environmental quality while ignoring functional and spatial aspects, which can lead to incomplete or unbalanced design solutions. A more integrated approach is needed to fully support health, comfort, and learning performance in built environments.

This passage rightly emphasizes the strong link between architectural quality and Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ). I agree that an anthropocentric, ergonomics-based approach is essential because indoor environments directly affect both physical health and psychological well-being. Good design is therefore not just about aesthetics or structure, but also about improving comfort, productivity, and overall quality of life for occupants.

This passage clearly explains how industrial and technological progress has disrupted the natural balance, contributing to climate change. I agree that adopting Nearly Zero Energy Buildings (NZEB) is a crucial step toward reducing energy consumption and environmental impact. It’s also important that the design approach is holistic, considering not just energy efficiency but also materials, user behavior, and overall sustainability. This makes the solution more effective and long-term in addressing environmental challenges.

This approach is particularly strong because it shifts the focus from purely technical measurements of Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) to the actual experiences of the people using the space. I think emphasizing subjective evaluation is very important, since comfort, satisfaction, and usability can vary widely between individuals and cannot always be fully captured through objective data alone. By giving importance to users’ needs and how they interact with the environment, the methodology becomes more practical. The findings from the case study at the University of Salerno further support this idea, showing that user feedback can directly inform more effective and sustainable interventions. In my opinion, combining subjective insights with technical assessments can lead to better decision-making, ensuring that renovations not only meet environmental standards but also improve occupant well-being and functionality. Overall, this reinforces the value of integrating user perception into sustainable building design and management.

This statement highlights an important and often overlooked connection between environmental comfort and user experience in buildings. I think it is especially valuable that it emphasizes a holistic approach, combining ergonomic principles with sustainability, rather than treating them as separate goals. In many cases, building design focuses heavily on technical performance, like energy efficiency or air quality, while neglecting how people actually interact with and navigate the space. By linking Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) with orientation and wayfinding, the approach recognizes that a truly effective indoor environment must support both physical comfort and cognitive ease. I also agree with the point about involving occupants, particularly in renovation projects. Existing buildings come with real users who have lived experiences, and their feedback can reveal practical issues that design standards alone might miss.