MASTER THESIS Biomimetic potential of sponge ... - IAP/TU Wien

Notwithstanding the problems involved in planning, and the uncertainty whether
daylighting is really effective to reduce energy consumption of buildings (Bordass et al.,
2001) (Mardaljevic et al., 2009) efforts keep being made, for most people clearly prefer
natural light over electric light (Roche et al., 2000). Individual preferences of people are hard
to describe. As observed in an empirical study by Roche and colleagues (2000) satisfaction
with daylight is very complex. Almost 75 % of the participants of their study in office
buildings across the UK asserted their clear preference for a workplace near a window. At
the same time, problems related to glare and reflections lead to a greater acceptance for
low levels than high levels of daylight, even though this study was carried out in the UK
where the daylight levels (especially within buildings) are rarely above the “about-right “
level (Roche et al., 2000) (cf. Figure 23). Windows therefore are a controversial asset in
office buildings. Appreciated by employees for the natural light and potentially nice view
they provide, the lack of which even can cause claustrophobic and depressing feelings,
windows do not always add to the quality of a workspace. Direct sunlight and even scattered
natural light (skylight) can contribute to eye-fatigue, visual discomfort and large windows
contribute to undesirable heat gain or loss (Kim & Wineman, 2005).
In the last years several works have been published that stress the wellbeing of
employees in the context of more sustainable workplaces. Pech and Slade (2006) observed
an increasing disengagement of employees, i.e. they do not identify with their work, and
have no positive, energetic connection with their work (Bakker et al., 2008). This
development is very likely a loss for the company, since productivity decreases, while
absences and complaints increase if employees have a negative perception of their
workplace (Roelofsen, 2002).
With regards to lighting of buildings it might therefore be hard to ascertain the “right”
light conditions as the perceptions of people seem to be highly complex and idiosyncratic (cf.
(Kim & Wineman, 2005) (Roche et al., 2000)). Therefore considering another factor
contributing to a better, more sustainable workspace might be worth considering. Lee and
Brand (2005) found that employees have a better impression of their workspace and are
therefore more satisfied with their job if they feel in control over their physical environment.
This want could partially be complied with if a lighting system offers the possibility to
personally modify it.
70