Building and Environment 205 (2021) 108190

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Building and Environment

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/buildenv

A review of the impact of the green landscape interventions on the urban

microclimate of tropical areas
Udayasoorian Kaaviya Priya a, b, Ramalingam Senthil c, *
a
School of Architecture and Interior Design, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, Kattankulathur, Chennai, India
b
Department of Architecture, Prime Nest College of Architecture and Planning, Tiruchirappalli, India
c
Department of Mechanical Engineering, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, Kattankulathur, Chennai, India

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

Keywords: The population explosion continually witnessed in urban areas results in more impenetrable surfaces like built
Microclimate structures and roads. Rapid urbanization increases air temperature and creates an urban heat island (UHI) effect
Urban heat island due to dwindling greenery. Thus, the UHI directly impacts the indoor and outdoor thermal comfort, air quality,
Thermal comfort
and well-being of the city dwellers by affecting the microclimate. Further, the artificial cooling demand is
Vertical greening
Landscape elements
increasing steeply in tropical cities, increasing carbon emissions. Therefore, researchers are currently focusing
Tropical areas upon mitigation of the UHI effect and improving the urban microclimate. This review article deals with urban
microclimate control using trees, grasses, shrubs, green walls, green roofs, and waterbodies. The contributory
role of vegetation in regulating air temperature is reviewed comprehensively, and recommendations are made
for ensuring the thermal comfort of urban residents. The effective use of vegetation in tropical cities can
significantly improve the microclimate by reducing the air temperature up to 4 ◦ C by green roofs, 9 ◦ C by using
trees, 12 ◦ C by the vertical greening system. The rooftop greeneries with trees, shrubs, and turfs can reduce the
building’s overall cooling load by 20.01 %, 18.85 %, and 9.08 %, respectively. Implementing urban greeneries is
essential to become sustainable cities and communities through a perfect blending of green landscape elements.
Further, the present work will be helpful to urban planners and architects working on incorporating such green
landscape interventions to provide better thermal comfort, mitigation of carbon emissions, and consequently
improve the quality of life for tropical urban city dwellers.

1. Introduction of the metropolitan residents by deteriorating human comfort with

In conformation to the global 2030 sustainable development plan,
every nation is encouraged to follow 17 sustainable development goals
(SDG), working towards the common betterment of humanity. SDG 11 is
directly related to sustainable cities and communities. The activities
related to SDG 11 also meet a few indicators of several other goals to
some extent. Increasing urbanization is one of the major problems faced
by cities worldwide. As predictions made by the United Nations, it is
anticipated that the urban areas will hold about 68 % of the world’s total
population by 2050 [1]. Significantly, tropical cities share about
one-third of the global population. Rapid urbanization and urban sprawl
have led to many negative impacts on urban areas by decreasing the air
quality and thermal comfort, increasing heat stress, increasing the
cooling load demand, and deterioration of the urban dwellers’ health
[2]. An increase in the UHI phenomenon significantly affects the health
increasing air temperatures.
Tropical countries like Asia and Africa are expected to witness
continuing urban expansion and increase nearly 1.1% and 1.5% of
population increase, respectively, every year [3–5]. Increasing built-up
structures and construction to support the needs of growing urbaniza­
tion is followed by consequent depletion of the green covers, thereby
resulting in the UHI phenomenon and heat stress [6]. As a result of the
excessive increase in urban temperature, nearly 2330 lives were lost in
the tropical Asian country of India due to the scorching summer heat­
wave in 2015 [7]. The increasing heatwave incidents and their adverse
impact on urban occupants’ health and well-being have recently become
researchers’ primary concerns [8,9].
The building sector is responsible for the maximum energy con­
sumption demand over one-third of the total energy required to provide
comfortable living conditions with heating, cooling, and ventilation

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: senthilr@srmist.edu.in (R. Senthil).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2021.108190
Received 28 May 2021; Received in revised form 11 July 2021; Accepted 23 July 2021
Available online 27 July 2021
0360-1323/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
U.K. Priya and R. Senthil
systems [10]. The introduction of vegetation into the building envelope
and the intermediate spaces between buildings can significantly help to
reduce the quantum of such energy needs [11,12]. Excessive
air-conditioning systems increase energy consumption, emit harmful
greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, compromising air quality and
outdoor thermal comfort [13,14]. There is an urgent need to ensure
energy efficiency in the building sector to address the concerns of global
warming, the UHI effect, and their associated adverse impacts [15].
Urban green infrastructure (UGI) plays a prominent role in cooling
and mitigating the UHI effect [16–19]. Urban green spaces are consid­
ered to be a cost-effective way for climate adaptation [20]. Proper
design of urban areas, incorporating the vegetation, urban space
morphology, and correct building orientation are considered essential
parameters in reducing energy consumption and targeting sustainable
thermal comfort [21,22].
The central UGIs that control the urban environment’s microclimate
are parks, trees, green roofs (GR), and green walls (GW) [23]. Green
elements influence urban spaces’ thermal environment through shading,
insulation, evapotranspiration, and wind barrier effects [24–26]. Many
researchers have quantified these elements’ effects on temperature
control inside and outside the building in different climates. The results
of earlier research works vary concerning different climates as the
design, plant species characteristics, and performance significantly with
different environments and locations [24–26]. Climatic factors like
temperature, relative humidity, wind velocity, and solar radiation of
different areas decide the efficiency of the greening systems [27–29].
Tropical regions are located near the equator with latitude limits by
Tropic of Cancer (23◦ N) and Capricon (23◦ S). Within this regional limit,
the areas with the average temperature during the coldest month above
18 ◦ C are coming under tropical climate “A” as per the Koppen Geiger
classification system. These are further subcategorized into the regions:
no dry season (Af), short dry season (Am), winter dry season (Aw) [30].
These climate regions demand cooling systems for providing comfort­
able living conditions during the hottest months.
The tropical region faces increasing densification in urban areas and
expansion of low density in rural areas, causing temperature increase in
urban areas. Tropical regions are naturally green, but the impacts of
urban development on the vegetation are immense. For climate-
sensitive design and planning in tropics use of vegetation is suggested
as one of the critical strategies [31]. Greenery concepts improved
shading and wind convection [29]. In a tropical climate, solar shading is
the main factor in designing urban spaces for achieving reduced heat
gain [32,33]. Even with increasing urban density and escalating energy
demand, tropical climate regions can ensure consistent energy savings
throughout the year by using vertical greening systems (VGS) [34–37].
This paper presents green landscape elements’ interventions on the
urban thermal environment in tropical climatic locations based on
Koppen climate classification.
The present review is segmented into six chapters. Section 1 in­
troduces UGI and the characteristics of tropical climates. Section 2
outlines the literature selection methodology. Section 3 details the in­
terventions of green elements in urban infrastructure. Section 4 con­
solidates the discussion on green elements. Section 5 involves
recommendations, and Section 6 provides the concluding remarks and
future scope.
2. Methodology
The study started with identifying relevant articles on the thermal
performance of various green landscape elements. The literature review
is carried out using Scopus and ScienceDirect databases with search
keywords of “thermal comfort”, “green wall (GW)’, “green roof”, “living
walls (LW)”, “trees”, “green roof (GR)”, “grass”, “shrubs”, and “water­
bodies”. The total number of articles appeared on the initial identifica­
tion is 1675. The number of abstracts dealt with the temperature
reduction in urban areas using green landscape elements are screened to
2
Building and Environment 205 (2021) 108190
280. One of the scrutinizing conditions is the recently published articles
and well within a decade. Further scrutiny is carried out with the
keyword “urban tropical microclimate”, “microclimate,” or “Tropical
areas.” The non-retrievable and incomplete documents are excluded.
Finally, the 170 pieces of literature, including a few reports, books,
research, and review articles are found eligible and included here.
Finally, the papers that studied the thermal effects of landscape in
tropical climate ‘A’ as per Koppen climate classification were filtered
and selected for analysis. Significantly, 129 recent research articles are
selected from the tropical climatic backgrounds that reduce the air and
surface temperature in urban locations. The thermal impacts of VGS,
trees, and GRs in tropical locations report quantitative evidence of UGI
performance. Fig. 1 shows the keyword search and selection of literature
in detail. The articles on GWs, GRs, and trees together for tropical
climate are also reviewed. For the successful application of green ele­
ments, it is crucial to understand their respective climate performance.
The current review work analyzes the earlier research studies on the
performance of green landscape elements in a tropical climate. It aims to
help urban planners, and landscape designers gain a better under­
standing of the contribution of green landscape elements and the spe­
cific requirements and challenges of the warm, and humid urban
climate. It offers basic design strategies and feasible recommendations
for sustainably designing tropical urban spaces to mitigate heat stress
using green landscape features.
Most of the earlier research studies have focused on the thermal ef­
fects of UGIs through experimental work involving both laboratory and
field experiments. It is noted that most studies covered investigations
with a duration of fewer than 30 days. Less than 20% of the studies
conducted experiments for up to 6 months. There is a lack of literature
on various UGI offering a good understanding of their performance in a
complete cycle for a year. Fig. 2 shows the share of the nature of studies
like experimental, simulation, and combined experimental and simula­
tion and the duration of such studies to quantify the UHI effect and the
associated performance of green elements. The study’s outcome pro­
vides insights into the contributory role of various types of UGI in
temperature control.
3. Intervention of landscape elements in microclimate
UGIs are green vegetation, either natural or human-made; such
greeneries are provided for multiple buildings aiming to improve the
urban ecosystem [38,39]. Plants provide numerous benefits to urban
environments when integrated into the urban infrastructure [40]. Even
small green spaces at appropriate locations help to lower temperatures
and cool down the surrounding environment [41,42]. In hot, humid
climates, vegetation can significantly help to improve the local tem­
perature [43]. The benefits of UGIs are thermal performance, air, and
noise pollution reduction, aesthetics, a habitation for wildlife, economic
benefits, improvement in people’s health, mitigation of UHI effect, and
energy savings [44].
It is advised to use greeneries in every possible urban region space for
climate-proofing and alleviating heat stress [22]. The control of micro­
climate, energy-saving and UHI mitigation with the usage of foliage are
the significant benefits that stand out in urban areas [38]. Integration of
different UGIs in three scales – street, neighborhood, and microscale-is
essential for achieving a cooling effect for all the urban spaces and the
entire city. Considering the neighborhood scale, the vulnerability of the
human and physical environment needs to be assessed [45], and at the
microscale, proper place selection and implementation of UGI must be
ensured, as per Fig. 3. The measuring instruments and field experiments
must be in accordance with the ecosystem services provided by green
infrastructures [46].
An experiment to observe people’s perception of many ecosystem
services provided by the greening systems in Singapore revealed that
temperature control is the critical parameter discerned and preferred
[47]. Trees, GRs, VGS, water bodies, grass, and shrubs are actively
U.K. Priya and R. Senthil Building and Environment 205 (2021) 108190

Fig. 1. The keyword search and the selection procedure of documents.

Fig. 2. The percentage of nature of literature, (a) Types of studies conducted, (b) The duration of the experiments.

promoted as effective and sustainable solutions to control the heat stress
and UHI effect in urban areas. In recent years, there has been increased
interest in green buildings strategies and sustainable materials such as
the shading effect of trees, insulation provided by greening systems, and
the evapotranspiration cooling of plants [48]. The cooling performance
of the urban green vegetation varies with different plant species used,
local climatic background, the pattern of vegetation arrangement, wind
movement, and urban forms [49].
3.1. Thermal performance of trees
As one of the forms of vegetation, trees influence the urban micro­
climate by controlling the temperature at pedestrian level, at urban
canyon level, and consequently mitigating UHI impact at the city level.
The effect of trees in the urban area is based on varying scales like a
single tree at the building level, a row of trees on urban canyons, a
cluster of trees in parks and open spaces, and forests. Trees influence the

3
U.K. Priya and R. Senthil Building and Environment 205 (2021) 108190

Fig. 3. Prioritization framework for optimizing UGI cooling benefit [45].

urban microclimate through shading, photosynthesis, and evapotrans­
piration [40]. In a tropical climate, the air temperature beneath trees is
relatively less than that in the open space. Trees in an urban park
reduced the temperature by 2–2.5 ◦ C in a field measurement undertaken
in Australia [50]. Fig. 4 shows the cooling effects of trees. Trees aid the
reflection, interception, and absorption of solar irradiance and cooling
effect by shading.
A monitoring system was developed to assess the cooling effect of
different types of trees in Malaysia’s urban areas by measuring the
temperature and humidity around different kinds of trees for two
months [51]. The study showed that different species offered different
temperature reductions, with Hopeaodarata offering a maximum ther­
mal decrease of 9.2 ◦ C. The highest relative humidity of about 74.5 %
was observed in Mesuaferrea, and the increase in relative humidity
causes a reduction in air temperature. The influence of dense trees re­
sults in evapotranspiration effects on the surrounding microclimate.
An assessment of the impacts of trees on the urban microclimate in
Bhopal during summer was undertaken by measuring the apparent

Fig. 4. The cooling effect of trees [50].

4
U.K. Priya and R. Senthil
temperature (AT) and mean radiant temperature (MRT) of the outdoor
environment [53,54]. Outdoor microclimate was assessed by estimating
AT equal to the temperature perceived by humans and MRT, a measure
of the human body surface’s net radiant heat gain and loss at a particular
point of time and space [52]. The study revealed that a 10 % increase in
canopy tree density would reduce the AT up to 0.3 ◦ C. Consequently, a
canopy with a density of 80 % coverage will reduce about 2.5 ◦ C of the
AT. Plants with a dense canopy of coverage above 70 % and moderate
canopy with 40–70 % of coverage resulted in respective lower air tem­
peratures of 2.1 ◦ C and 1.9 ◦ C than open canopy with coverage less than
40 %, as shown in Fig. 5. The dense canopy showed 4.61 ◦ C and the
medium canopy showed 2.40 ◦ C lower MRT than the open canopy.
These results show the influence of tree canopy cover on the microcli­
mate and level of human thermal comfort [54].
Thermal comfort index and relative strain index measured between
two typical buildings in Nigeria with and without vegetation showed
that the building with greenery was more thermally comfortable both
inside and outside [55]. The duration of uncomfortable conditions was
lesser in the building with vegetation. The comfort level under scorching
temperature was observed for 2 h in a shaded building and 5 h in an
unshaded building during working hours. Another experimental study in
Malaysia with two houses showed that the trees’ shading effect
contributed to an inside air temperature reduction of up to 4 ◦ C in the
house with more vegetation than the house with less vegetation [56].
A comparison of the thermal comfort of four different urban open
spaces-park, lakefront, market, and open grassland in Bhopal during
summer showed that gardens with trees and vegetation were thermally
more comfortable than the other cases. The field measurement of air
temperature in parks showed that they were 3.1 ◦ C, 0.4 ◦ C, 6.7 ◦ C cooler
than the market, lakefront, and open grassland, respectively. The MRT
reduction in parks was up to 0.7 ◦ C in zones with 10 % tree cover and
2.2 ◦ C in 70 % tree cover, respectively. The physiological equivalent
temperature (PET) reduction was 0.8 ◦ C and 2.6 ◦ C lower in areas with
10 % and in areas with 70 % tree cover. The tree cover and its evapo­
transpiration effect highly influence the MRT and PET. Thus, a green
environment provides comfortable thermal conditions both physically
and psychologically than other open spaces in the urban environment
[57].
Yahia [21] analyzed four different urban scenarios of vegetation
(base case, the base case with extension, the base case with trees on
streets, and the base case with street trees and horizontal shading de­
vices). The best case was noted to be trees and shading device with lesser
PET value of 10.5 ◦ C and standard effective temperature (SET) value up
to 4.4 ◦ C lesser than the base case. Trees are known to have a positive
environmental impact. Another similar study in Taiwan’s urban parks in
summer showed a difference of about 9 ◦ C in SET between shaded and
Fig. 5. Sky view from under the three tree canopies of open, moderately dense, and dense [54].
5
Building and Environment 205 (2021) 108190
unshaded areas. The overcrowding of plants caused temperature in­
crease in downstream locations. Also, wind speed and shading are the
two main factors that affect users’ thermal comfort [58,59].
An assessment showed an increase in the tree and vegetation cover in
Singapore decreased the universal thermal climate index up to 3 ◦ C at
midday for all-weather conditions [60]. Vegetation use was suggested as
an effective method to provide shading for building envelopes and
improve the thermal comfort of the surrounding regions by evaporative
cooling in tropical climates [61]. The cooling capacity of trees depends
on the density of the foliage. Field measurement and Ecotect simulation
were conducted on two different species of trees [62]. Mesua ferrea and
Hura crepitans showed that Mesua ferrea with a leaf area index (LAI) of
6.1 had better solar radiation filtration up to 93% than Hura crepitans
with an LAI of 1.5 and solar filtration up to 79 %. Another comparison
between two urban street canyons in Singapore is having mature trees
and palm trees carried out [63]. The results showed that the canyon with
mature trees had a better air temperature reduction of up to 1.1 ◦ C than
the palm tree canyons due to the shading effect of the mature trees. The
mature trees produced a cooling effect of up to 1.5 ◦ C, whereas palm
trees produced a cooling effect of only 0.5 ◦ C. Canyons with mature trees
showed more thermal comfort and greening than the canyon with palm
trees.
The field measurement and simulated results in Malaysia showed
that a combination of trees with high canopy density and a high LAI of
9.7 and cool material with high albedo of 0.8 [64]. Such combinations
can reduce average air temperature up to 2.7–3.5 ◦ C [64]. Trees with
high sky view factors significantly reduce the air temperature in open
urban areas [65]. Trees with medium to low sky view factors reduce
MRT. Trees combined with other mitigation strategies like shading,
wind movement could effectively lessen the UHI effects. The presence of
an urban green environment improves the immediate built-up
environment.
Thermal measurement in urban green areas of Singapore showed
that the green environment’s average temperature was cooler than that
of the surrounding built-up environment [66,67]. The built-up envi­
ronment is closer to the green areas displayed 1.5 ◦ C lower average air
temperature. Simulated results showed energy-saving of up to 10 % in
cooling load when the building environments were located closer to the
green urban areas. The temperature of the surroundings increased with
increasing distance from green spaces.
A thermal comfort study using 11 different vegetation scenarios in
street design revealed that the case with more vegetation showed the
lowest air temperature, MRT, PET, and reduced air temperature of up to
0.7 ◦ C than the case with no vegetation [68]. The MRT reduced up to
4 ◦ C under more vegetation than the no vegetation scenario. The wind
speed also got reduced because of more vegetation, but the cooling effect
U.K. Priya and R. Senthil
overtook the reduced wind speed with reduced air temperature and
MRT.
Among different forms and combinations of trees in the urban
environment, secondary forests produced more cooling effects in
Singapore [43]. Comparing the impact of five different forms of vege­
tation showed more air temperature reduction of up to 1.7 ◦ C in the
secondary forest followed by 0.9 ◦ C for tree canopy with shrubs under
with and 0.6 ◦ C with the only tree canopy. Trees in tropical climates
mainly help reduce heat stress and mitigate the elevated temperature in
an urban environment.
Trees cool the surrounding microclimate to a greater extent, mainly
through shading and evapotranspiration. Certain factors influence the
level of cooling performance rendered by trees in urban locations,
leading to differential results in different places. The first is the char­
acteristics of trees like coverage, density, branching structure, and
height. The higher the tree’s density and range, the more is its capacity
to intercept solar radiation and reduce the air temperature. Trees with a
high sky view factor reduce air temperature significantly. Trees with
medium to low sky view factors allow for reradiation loss and reducing
the MRT effectively.
The planting pattern and arrangement of trees play a vital role in the
cooling effect. More trees do not always produce more cooling effects.
Overcrowding of trees may block wind flow, causing an increase in
temperature and humidity, especially in tropical climates. Though
continuous trees provide more shading, proper wind flow should be
considered by placing optimal small trees or shrubs below the canopy.
The thermal effect of trees is enhanced by combining grasses for addi­
tional evaporative cooling effects.
Apart from the planting pattern and plant trait, the surrounding
geometry influences the cooling effect of trees. Trees located in more
height-to-width ratio have a lower cooling impact when compared to
trees in a low height-to-width ratio. The cooling effect of trees along
with horizontal shading devices can provide more thermal comfort in
the surroundings. The green areas like forests and parks impact the
surrounding neighborhood, and the closer the distance, there is more
cooling effect.
3.2. Thermal performance of VGS
A VGS or vertical garden refers to the growth of plants on building
envelopes or support structures [71]. Integrating vegetation into
building construction by including greenery on the façade of buildings is
gaining popularity. It is considered a construction material as it helps to
improve the building’s sustainability, besides offering notable ecological
and environmental benefits [72–75]. A study comparing the perfor­
mance of VGS in four different climates observed that the cooling and
energy benefits of VGS are weather-dependent [34]. VGSs are classified
into two main types: green façades and LW, based on the construction
system, support structure, and the kind of plants and substrates used.
The green façade is further classified into the traditional or direct green
façade, double skin green façade, perimeter flowerpots, and the LWs are
classified into panels, modules, or blankets [10,48,74,76,77]. Vertical
gardens are witnessed as early as the seventh century with the evidence
of the vertical hanging gardens of Babylon [48,78,79]. The VGS in his­
tory was for aesthetics, shading, and cooling. Many researchers were
investigating the benefits and characteristics of VGS in different climatic
contexts [78,80]. The VGS in a tropical climate was applied mainly for
passive cooling [81,82], energy-saving [83], and thermal comfort [42,
84–87]. The design of VGS should consider the characteristics, compo­
nents, foliage, air cavity thickness, and local climate for better perfor­
mance and environmental sustainability [88,89]. In high population,
land shortage, and high land cost locations, the greening systems on
building envelope act to provide sufficient greeneries for people [40,
90]. A significant energy saving in dwellings was materialized
cost-effectively with VGS [69,70,79]. The most perceived benefits of
VGS by occupants were thermal comfort (34 %), visual comfort (45 %),
6
Building and Environment 205 (2021) 108190
and mental relaxation (49 %). Visual and sensory benefits are the
top-ranked advantages, followed by thermal benefits [91]. The types of
VGS are shown in Fig. 6.
Measuring the solar radiation, air temperature, wind speed in front
of the VGS, away from VGS, and the space between the wall and VGS
helps quantify the thermal effects of VGS [63,92,93,95]. The heat flux
reduction through the exterior wall in the presence of the plant layer can
be calculated using the equation,
( )
(Text bare − Tint bare ) Text veg − Tint veg
−
Qbare − Qveg
= R R
Qbare (Text bare − Tint bare )
(1)
R
( )
(Text bare − Tint bare ) − Text veg − Tint veg
=
Text bare − Tint bare
Where, Qbare and Qveg are the heat fluxes through the bare and vegetated
exterior walls, respectively; Text bare and Text veg are the exterior surface
temperatures of the bare and vegetated facades, respectively; Tint bare,
and Tint veg are the interior surface temperatures behind the bare and
vegetated facades, respectively, and R is the thermal resistance of the
façade [96].
The overall thermal resistance of the vegetated wall and the plant
layer is calculated from the equations [97,98].
Qbw
Rvw = Rbw (2)
Qvw
Rplant = Rvw − Rbw (3)
Where, Rvw and Rbw are thermal resistance of vegetated wall and bare
wall, respectively (m2K/W); Qvw and Qbw are heat transferred from
vegetated wall and bare wall, respectively (W), and Rplant is thermal
resistance due to the plants (m2K/W).
An actual building experiment was carried out in Jakarta, Indonesia,
by Othman et al. [82] to evaluate the temperature reduction effect of a
VGS in a tropical climate. They measured the temperature and humidity
inside and outside buildings with and without GWs. The maximum
temperature of buildings with a green cover without a green cover was
2.3 ◦ C inside and 2.55 ◦ C outside. Buildings with VGS displayed better
thermal performance than buildings without VGS. The greenery build­
ing had a lower temperature by about 3.79 % than the building without
a green cover. The humidity of a building with VGS was relatively lower
than a building without VGS [82]. An experimental study using minia­
ture building models in Indonesia revealed outdoor and indoor surface
temperature reduction to a maximum of 9.9 ◦ C and 6.5 ◦ C, respectively.
The maximum outdoor and indoor air temperature decrease was 5.7 ◦ C
and 1.9 ◦ C, respectively. This temperature reduction contributed to
decreasing the building’s cooling load as it acts as a passive cooling
design technique [99,100].
The performance of a bio façade wall with Psophocarpus tetrogo­
nobulus in pots was compared against an identical room with a bare wall
facing the same west orientation. The results showed that the average
outdoor surface temperature of the vegetated wall was 11 ◦ C lower than
that of a typical bare wall. The indoor surface temperature was almost
the same for both rooms. The air temperature of the rooms with and
without plants was measured; it was seen that the installation of bio
façade reduced indoor air temperature by 0.6 ◦ C [86]. The performance
of the VGS depends on the selection of appropriate plant species. An
experimental investigation in Indonesia on the thermal effect of two
plant species, Amaranthus hybridus and Brassica juncea revealed that the
temperature reduction was more prominent with Amaranthus. The
average indoor air temperature and landscape air temperature re­
ductions were 1.2 ◦ C and 1 ◦ C with in Amaranthus and 0.2 ◦ C and 0.6 ◦ C,
respectively, with Brassica [81].
Even edible species like Psophocarpus tetrogonobulus installed in
VGS showed an average outdoor surface temperature reduction of 2.4 ◦ C
U.K. Priya and R. Senthil Building and Environment 205 (2021) 108190

Fig. 6. Types of VGS [94].

and a maximum reduction of up to 6.4 ◦ C in Malaysia [101,102]. The
growth rate of plant species should be considered before installing an
indirect and indirect green façade system. The plant’s height and growth
level stimulate thermal performance. A study assessed the different
tropical climber plant species growing on direct and indirect green
façade systems [103]. For the indirect mesh system, Quisqualis indica,
Wisteria sinensis and Lonicera japonica showed better foliage growth.
Parthenocissus dalzielii and Campsis grandiflora showed good and fair
growth for the direct system.
Different types of VGS can influence the surrounding microclimate in
varying degrees. Experimental research in the corridors of a five-storey
office building in Malaysia investigated the thermal performance effect
of two types of VGS- Green façade and LW. The temperature and hu­
midity parameters were measured in the north-facing VGS. The average
air temperature reduction with the green façade was 0.6 ◦ C and with the
LW was 0.8 ◦ C when compact to the reference wall without vegetation.
The drop in maximum air temperature was 8.4 ◦ C in green façade and
11.9 ◦ C in the LW. Modular LWs showed better performance because the
LW’s dense vegetation filtered more sunlight than the green façade.
In contrast to temperature, the LW increased mean relative humidity
by 1.1 %, which in the case of the green façade was only 0.3 % than the
reference wall. This difference occurred because of more solar radiation
penetration through green façade cable systems than modular LW sys­
tems [104]. The internal corridor had a consistent temperature reduc­
tion up to 5 ◦ C [105]. Another experimental comparative study in
Malaysia’s hot, humid climate between examining the difference bare
wall, green façade, and LW using test boxes showed better temperature
reduction with the LW. The temperature reduction with the LW was 8 ◦ C
in air cavity, 6.3 ◦ C in cavity surface, 4 ◦ C in indoor air without venti­
lation, 3.5 ◦ C in indoor air with ventilation, and 4 ◦ C in the indoor
surface. The respective values in the case of the green façade were
6.5 ◦ C, 3 ◦ C, 2.5 ◦ C, 5.5 ◦ C, 3.5 ◦ C. The LW performed better than the
green façade system. The indoor air humidity was higher for LWs than
for the green façade [71].
In Singapore, the performance of eight different LW systems was
compared against a bare concrete wall based on surface temperature, air
temperature, and relative humidity [106]. The study showed that
maximum surface temperature reduction of up to 10 ◦ C was observed in
the LW system with modular panels. Minimum of 4.36 ◦ C was observed
in the indirect green façade system due to the absence of substrate
insulation and cooling effect. The maximum reduction in ambient air
temperature of up to 3.33 ◦ C was observed in the LW modular system at
0.15 m away from the LW. In Sri Lanka, a LW showed better thermal
performance with a maximum exterior surface, interior surface, and
internal air temperature reduction of 10.16 ◦ C, 3.31 ◦ C, and 2.11 ◦ C,
respectively [107]. The corresponding values in the indirect system
were 8.65 ◦ C, 2.32 ◦ C, 1,82 ◦ C and in the direct method, they were
6.36 ◦ C, 1.82 ◦ C, 0.66 ◦ C, respectively.
The thermal effects of the foliage are highly influenced by the
coverage and density of the plants. An experimental evaluation in
Malaysia assessing the shading performance of a tropical climber,
Anemopaegma chamberlayne using a free-standing wall with modular
trellis and planter box facing west, measured the leaf coverage and solar
transmittance through various leaf layers. The measured average solar
radiation transmittance for 1,2,3,4 leaf layers was 0.64, 0.44, 0.35, 0.24
respectively. It was evident that the solar radiation transmission
reduction was influenced by the number of leaf layers and leaf coverage.
The shading coefficient is the proportion of solar radiation gain behind
and in front of the canopy of VGS. It is expressed as,
∑
A0 I0 + nk=1 Ak Ik
sc = ∑ (4)
Af + A0 + nk=1 Ak
Where, A0 is the area of open gaps in the canopy (m2), I0 is solar radi­
ation transmitted through open gaps (=1), Ik is solar radiation trans­
mitted from one leaf layer to k leaf layers (0–1), k is number of leaf
layers, Ak is area of canopy with kth leaf layers (m2), and Af is the area of
the climbing frame (m2). The shading coefficient of the species was
observed to be 0.21, and it was considered as a suitable climber for the
modular trellis structure for providing shading and reducing the heat
flux through the wall [108]. The suggested selection criteria for plants
ideal for a vertical garden in a tropical climate are listed in Table 2.
The higher the plant’s LAI in the LW system, the higher the tem­
perature reduction due to the plant’s shading effect. Both LAI and leaf
size are essential to attain better thermal performance from the LW.
Experiments were carried out with a LW with three different plant
species installed in the test box, and the results were compared against a
reference wall in Thailand for six months, covering the winter and
summer seasons. The plant species with dense foliage and smaller leaves
showed better performance in temperature reduction with surface
temperature reduced to a maximum of 7.2 ◦ C and indoor temperature up
to 3.3 ◦ C [109].
A UHI simulation using a ten-storey hypothetical building was con­
ducted by Hein et al. [83,106] in Singapore. Their study showed that
increasing the green coverage caused a drop in the air temperature of the
surrounding region. More plant coverage resulted in better performance,
as seen in the lowering of the MRT. Plant with lower shading coefficients
had better thermal insulation and shading effect. The simulation was
conducted for three different scenarios, namely opaque wall, a wall with
windows, and a glass façade with different vegetation coverage of 0, 50,
and 100 % for each scenario. A mean temperature reduction of about
10 ◦ C was observed in the opaque wall with 100 % coverage compared
to the wall with no greenery. The addition of ventilation boosts the

7
U.K. Priya and R. Senthil
greening system’s performance. A rooftop residence in Thailand
experimented with a bio façade on the western wall compared it against
a standard room adjacent to it. The vertical climbing plant chosen was
blue trumpet vine. The experiment was carried out under two conditions
with and without ventilation. The plant’s coverage was almost 90 %,
with a maximum of 4–5 layers of leaves. The bio façade room had a
higher air velocity of 0.05–0.35 m/s when compared with a standard
room with a value less than 0.05 m/s. This higher air velocity reduced
heat gain in the daytime for the case with ventilation.
An experimental investigation in Sri Lanka at three different VGS –
direct, indirect, and LW systems assessed the temperature measurements
on three sites for each scenario [84]. The maximum exterior wall surface
temperature reduction was 9.31 ◦ C in the LW, 9.59 ◦ C in the indirect
green façade, and 6.39 ◦ C in the case of direct green façade. The
maximum air temperature reduction in front of the GW at 1 m distance
was 0.71 ◦ C, 1.12 ◦ C, and 0.91 ◦ C in the LW, indirect and direct system,
respectively. According to the simulated results of an office building
with and without greening, the GW could reduce indoor temperature up
to 2.4 ◦ C and had energy savings of up to 10.97 MW. About 58 % of the
occupants perceived the VGS to be thermally comfortable. The differ­
ence between indoor and outdoor temperatures was an average of
3.63 ◦ C and a maximum of 9.93 ◦ C for the case with ventilation. The
difference in RH was 6.68 % and resulted in only a minor effect on
thermal comfort at night. The bio façade obstructed the heat dissipation
at night and hence did not help decrease temperature. However, proper
ventilation was applied to resolve such minor issues [87]. Another factor
that influences the thermal effects of the VGS is the outdoor weather
conditions. An Indonesian building showed an average interior surface
temperature reduction of 2.1 ◦ C in a vegetated façade than a bare façade.
The LW’s surface temperature increased with an increase in OAT,
resulting in decreased effective thermal resistance [110].
The installation of a VGS brings about the MRT reduction of the
immediate surrounding environment, and the effect is more during a
period of higher solar radiation. A comparison was made between two
cases using two GWs installed on the rooftop of a building in Singapore
to assess the effect of a green wall on MRT and surface temperature. For
two cases, the measurement was carried out, where case 1 had both GWs
installed, and case two, where one green wall was removed. The GW
removal caused an increase in surface temperature up to 6.7 ◦ C and
increased MRT up to 12.8 ◦ C [111]. The influence of VGS for controlling
pedestrian level thermal comfort was limited to 3 m in front of the GW.
VGS installed at heights above 6 m had no impact on maintaining the
pedestrian comfort level [26].
Installation of VGS in the building offers temperature reduction on
multiple parameters like indoor and OST, indoor and OAT, even MRT in
some experiments. The usage of VGS for thermal performance requires
attention to multiple factors like plant species, orientation, and types of
the greening system. As far as the construction system is concerned, the
indirect green façade system offers a simple installation and mainte­
nance process, whereas LW involves expensive installation and main­
tenance. But considering the thermal performance living wall system
performs well than the indirect green façade system due to its versatile
nature in using a wide variety of plant types and added insulation and
evaporation effect provided by the substrate layer.
The most used plant species were the blue trumpet vine and Pso­
phocarpus tetrogonobulus. On comparing the results of these species,
they had different effects in different locations. Blue trumpet vine on
double skin green façade in west orientation reduced IAT up to 3 ◦ C in
Malaysia and 9.93 ◦ C in Thailand. The difference in the results might be
due to the experiment conducted as used test box and other in an actual
room. The following parameter might be the difference in air cavity
thickness between the two experiments in which Malaysia had 0.05 m
air cavity whereas Thailand had 0.7 m air cavity. The cooling effect
produced is a combined result of multiple factors, including the local
climate and surrounding conditions, making it difficult to generalize the
systems and their impacts for all tropical locations without a critical
8
Building and Environment 205 (2021) 108190
analysis over all seasons. Most of the studies conducted were for a
duration within one month, and very few studies were conducted for six
months. The behavior of a system and plant material throughout a year
is still lacking.
Certain common aspects can be considered in general for installing
VGS tropical location to have control on microclimate. As far as the
temperature reduction and plant characteristics are concerned, the
plants with high LAI have a greater number of leaf layers and coverage
with more temperature reduction capacity in general. The air cavity
between 0.5 and 1 m performed well than cavities with less than 0.5 m.
Regarding the orientation west façade had more reduction in tempera­
ture than the east and south. The incidence of solar radiation and wind
movement is essential for the evaporative and shading effect and to
avoid high humidity levels in a tropical climate.
3.3. Thermal performance of green roofs (GRs)
GR refers to the vegetation planted on the flat or sloping rooftop of a
building. GRs can be classified into extensive GRs with smaller plants
and thin substrate layers and intensive GRs with thick substrate and
larger plants. One main contribution of GRs in the urban environment is
the thermal reduction and energy-saving in urban buildings and the
mitigation of the UHI effect. Other benefits of GRs are stormwater
management, aesthetics appeal, increased productivity, improvement of
habitation, reduction of noise, and lesser pollution. GRs control the
building’s thermal performance by shading, evaporative cooling, and
insulation properties of plants and the growing medium [114,115]. A
rooftop garden mitigates the UHI in tropical climates. A temperature
drop of 10–15 ◦ C was noted in Sri Lanka with rooftop gardens [116].
After installing an extensive GR on the rooftop of a building in
Singapore, a field measurement revealed a maximum reduction of 18 ◦ C
in surface temperature. The thin substrate layer of the extensive GR, the
dark color of the substrate, and the low-lying plants of the extensive GR
resulted in less thermal performance than the intensive GR system. The
thin layer of extensive GR, on the other hand, quickly released the
trapped heat and offered better cooling at night. The extensive system
blocked about 60 % of the heat gain [117]. The performance of the GR
depends on the plant species selection. A field measurement on three
rooftop greenery setups in Singapore with three different species esti­
mated that the MRT above the GR was lower than that of the concrete
roof. The maximum was 10 ◦ C. The plant species with a high evapo­
transpiration rate and shrubs with low albedo showed better perfor­
mance in temperature reduction, irrespective of the LAI [59].
Evapotranspiration time (ET) and MRT were obtained by using Eq. (5),
[ ]
( )4 2.20 × 108 Va0.119 ( ) 0.25
Tmrt = Tg + 273.15 + × Tg − Ta − 273.5 (5)
εD 0.4
Where, D = Globe diameter (m).
ε = Globe emissivity
( )
Wa − Wb 1
ET = × (6)
10 minutes APlot
Where, ET = Plant evapotranspiration rate (mm min− 1), Wa = Weight of
load cell 5 min before the experiment (kg), Eb = Weight of load cell after
5 min after the experiment (kg), and Aplot = Area of plot (m2).
An experimental study was conducted on the rooftop of a low-rise
commercial building in Singapore using intensive GR. The ambient
temperature and RH were measured for six different plant species for
both indoor and outdoor surfaces. The plants with a higher LAI resulted
in better temperature reduction than the plants with a lower LAI. The
maximum surface temperature reduction was up to 30 ◦ C), while the
ambient air temperature was 4.2 ◦ C [118]. The GR reduced the tem­
perature fluctuation range of the interiors. Mauritius’s numerical and
U.K. Priya and R. Senthil
experimental investigation showed a reduction in the indoor roof sur­
face temperature up to 4 ◦ C. The IAT variation of GRs ranged between 19
and 23 ◦ C, which was relatively lower than the 16–32 ◦ C of conventional
roofs [120].
The installation of a GR leads to a reduction of both indoor and
outdoor temperature of buildings. A GR installed in Malaysia with plant
species Ipomoea pescapre reduced the IAT up to 1.73 ◦ C, outdoor and
indoor surface temperatures up to 4.62 ◦ C and 7.86 ◦ C, respectively, in
summer [121]. An experimental study in Singapore on the rooftop of a
university investigated the contribution of GRs over a conventional roof
in reducing the temperature. The maximum and average air temperature
reduction observed were 1.3 ◦ C and 0.5 ◦ C, respectively. The maximum
surface temperature reduction was 15.3 ◦ C, and the average was 7.3 ◦ C.
The air temperature observed was almost equal at night [122]. GRs
reduced air temperature to a maximum of 5 ◦ C in tropical climates than
other environments, as shown in Fig. 7. In Singapore, the extensive GR,
both with and without energy-saving cost, had a lower life cycle cost
than the exposed roof, with a net energy-saving of up to 14 %.
In contrast, intensive GRs always had a higher lifecycle cost than the
exposed flat roof with net energy savings of only up to 4 % [123–125]. A
GR has certain drawbacks if not properly maintained. It might result in
non-point source pollution in hot and humid cities without proper
maintenance [126]. Then the green roof has ten times more sediment
and nutrient concentration than that of a bare top [127]. Hence, the
maintenance cost of GR is more compared to other greeneries [112,113,
128].
A simulation study was conducted using Envimet software repli­
cating the actual conditions under six different UGI scenarios to inves­
tigate their suitability in mitigating UHI behavior in Colombo’s tropical
climate. The simulated scenarios showed temperature reduction of
1.87 ◦ C with trees on curbsides, 1.76 ◦ C with 100 % GR, 1.79 ◦ C with 50
% GR,1.86 ◦ C with 50 % green wall and 1.9 ◦ C with a combination of
trees on curbsides 50 % GR and 50 % GW than without any green
initiative. The temperature reduction was highest when combined UGI
followed by the GW and GRs [129]. An assessment of the thermal effect
of vegetation in different climates using a two-dimensional microscale
model revealed that on average, GRs reduced the surface temperature up
to 12.8 ◦ C in Riyadh and a maximum of 26.1 ◦ C in Mumbai. The
maximum and average daytime temperature decrease in Mumbai was
Fig. 7. The cooling mechanism of a GR [119].
9
Building and Environment 205 (2021) 108190
8 ◦ C and 6.6 ◦ C, respectively, for all green initiatives and 4.4 ◦ C and 2 ◦ C
in case of GWs. The hotter the climate, the better is the performance of
the greening systems. The energy demand for cooling reduced from 11 h
to 6 h in Mumbai for all green case initiatives, and in the case of the GW,
the reduction was up to 3 h [130].
The performance of the GR is like that of the LW, except that it is
installed horizontally. As in the VGS system, GRs also majorly influence
OST and OAT primarily. Evaporation and insulation remain the critical
processes in the cooling effect of GRs. Compared to LW, the green roof’s
influence on several parameters was limited. The performance of GRs
considers multiple factors like types of the system being used, plant
species, solar radiation, types of substrates, and water content in the soil.
A GR offers a much wider range of plant material applications than a
living wall system as it allows a wide range of shrubs, grasses, and trees.
As far as the characteristics of plant materials, plants with a high
evapotranspiration rate and low shrub albedo should be preferred over
high LAI. When comparing two experiments with an intensive GR
installed in the same climatic background, a differential result was
observed with surface temperature reduction up to 15 ◦ C in one and
30 ◦ C in other. The difference in results might be due to the type of plants
being used, where one had flowering plants and grass and the other had
trees and shrubs. As VGS, the function of GRs and results varies with
different combinations of the influencing factors discussed. The influ­
ence of GR is limited with the top floor and at roof level rather than at
pedestrian level. It is essential to monitor GR regularly for sedimentation
and nutrient concentration.
3.4. Thermal performance of grass and shrubs
Shrubs are plants with numerous woody stems with no dominant
stem structures and have dense, bushy, or open canopy structures.
Shrubs grow up to 3 m in height usually. Some plant species were
trained to climb on walls and support. Grasses are monocotyledonous
plants with blade-shaped narrow leaves. Both grasses and shrubs are a
part of green landscapes, either natural or artificial. Though they have
been widely used as aesthetic elements in urban design, their contri­
bution to temperature reduction and thermal comfort has been of in­
terest in various climates. Few researchers have explored the role of
grasses and shrubs in an urban location and their contribution to urban
U.K. Priya and R. Senthil
thermal comfort in tropical climates. Grasses have been used in GWs and
GRs to control the temperature in and around the building. Trees and
turfgrass were effective in controlling air temperatures during daytime
[131]. The application of grasses on the tops of building in Thailand
reduced the amount of heat transferred into the interior [132]. Appli­
cation of grass in roof reduced the temperature by evaporation process
and the moisture of the soil. The rooftop with 0.20 m soil depth and
manila grass reduced 81.05 % of heat transfer than the exposed roof. In
the same experiment, rooftop with 0.20 m soil depth and savanna grass
had 8.75 % less heat transfer than manila grass, indicating the impor­
tance of the grass being used. Savanna grass showed better heat transfer
reduction than manila grass species.
A simulation study at the National University of Singapore compared
rooftop greeneries performance using shrubs, trees, and turf in 10
different locations within the university [133]. It was observed that a
more cooling effect was attained by using denser greenery by applying
turfs. The cooling load energy savings were by 9.08 % with turfs, 18.85
% with shrubs, and 20.01 % with trees. Trees contributed to more
energy-saving, followed by shrubs and turfs. Perera et al. [134] assessed
the application of grass as GWs in Colombo. Among the nine plant
species, only three species exhibited a good growth rate and survival,
including two types of grasses: Axonopus fissifolius, Elusine indica and
an evergreen succulent Roheo spathacea. The highest temperature
reduction was observed in Axonopous grass of up 5.06 ◦ C and enhanced
thermal comfort in an urban context.
Application of grass has been proven effective in combination with
trees than using grass as a standalone element. Ali and Patnaik [57]
carried out the thermal comfort between parks, lakefront, open grass­
land, and a market lane in Bhopal. Among the four species, open
grassland recorded an increased PET of 46.7 ◦ C followed by market lane
41.8 ◦ C, lake 39.9 ◦ C and parks 38.5 ◦ C. Grassland had the most negli­
gible temperature reduction and contributed less to reducing PET. But
grasses in combination with trees in parks contributed to increased PET
reduction. A similar study in Singapore analyzed various landscape el­
ements like grass, trees, water bodies, different albedo materials and
combinations of the elements on thermal comfort and urban microcli­
mate using simulation [135]. It was observed that the addition of grass
as a standalone element reduced the surface temperature by 8 ◦ C, Air
temperature by 0.25–0.5 ◦ C and MRT in sunlit areas by 4–8 ◦ C. Though
this is less than the rest of the scenario, it is better than the base case and
water bodies. Grass in combination with trees showed significant tem­
perature reduction by 10 ◦ C in OST, 0.75 ◦ C in AT, 16 ◦ C in MRT and
12 ◦ C in PET.
A simulation study was carried out in the three different residential
locations of Kolkata evaluated various UHI mitigation strategies like
cool roof, cool pavement, green city, and cool city [136]. The existing
conditions were simulated with added trees and grasses in the green city
strategy, which proved to reduce the air temperature up to 0.7 ◦ C and
0.8 ◦ C and 1.1 ◦ C in different locations. However, in increasing the
cooling effect, trees contributed more than grass. In the overall result, a
cool city, a combination of vegetation, cool roof, and pavement, reduced
more PET than green city strategy highlighting the importance of mul­
tiple measures in UHI mitigation.
The addition of tree grass in the courtyard and its respective cooling
effect was assessed in Kuala Lumpur using simulation by Ghaffar­
ianhoseini et al. [137]. Five different cases were analyzed by adding 100
% grass, 25 % trees, 75 % trees, 50 % trees, and no trees and grass. It was
observed that grass had only limited influence on air temperature with
reduction up to 0.13 ◦ C whereas trees had more effect on the tempera­
ture, reducing up to 2.5 ◦ C in 75 % coverage.
Even shrubs in urban spaces have more effect if combined with trees.
A study in Singapore compared the cooling effect of 5 different types of
vegetation grass, shrub, trees, trees over the shrub, secondary forest
[43]. Among the five secondary forests had a more significant effect of
1.7 ◦ C followed by the tree over shrubs of 0.9 ◦ C reduction and trees with
0.6 ◦ C drop. Grass and shrub as standalone elements had no significant
10
Building and Environment 205 (2021) 108190
effect due to insufficient shading and evapotranspiration. Thus, the
magnitude of the cooling effect differs with different vegetation.
Using shrubs in the rooftop garden shows that shrubs’ thermal per­
formance is irrespective of LAI and is related to the evaporative rate and
shrub albedo [59]. Plants with three different species on three plots
showed that though plants in plot 2 had a height of 1.5 m and LAI of
7.21, their MRT reduction was less than plants in plots two and three of
LAI 2.78 and 3.59, respectively. The species used were Phyllanthus
cochinchinensis on plot 1, Heliconia American dwarf on plot 2 and
Sphagneticola trilobata on plot 3. It was observed that the evapotrans­
piration rate of plots 1 and 3 were higher than plot two, and shrub al­
bedo of 1 and 3 of 0.28 was more elevated than plot 2, which was only
0.16. Thus, the MRT reduction in shrubs on the GR was more associated
with shrub albedo and evapotranspiration rate compared to LAI.
Though the temperature reduction of shrubs and grasses is not sig­
nificant as trees, GW and GR, it works well in combination with other
elements. Mainly using shrubs and grasses in combination with trees
works as a great combination than the rest of the elements in reducing
the temperature. Application of shrubs and grass is not only limited to
ground level but can also be extended as GWs and GRs. Like GRs, the
cooling effect of shrubs and grasses also depends on evapotranspiration
rate than LAI as shading is not the main factor here for reducing tem­
perature. Shrubs as an individual element can be used in shading walls at
lower levels. If grasses used in shaded places, it might increase the hu­
midity level and hence proper ventilation is required to overcome the
humidity increase. Grasses, when placed in full sun location, might
result in more water requirements.
3.5. Thermal performance of water bodies
Blue spaces in urban areas like rivers, ponds, lakes, springs, and
canals are expected to provide a cooling effect for the surrounding
environment. Water bodies usually have lower surface temperatures
during hot weather conditions than the surrounding hard surfaces
[138]. However, water bodies behave in contrast at night. It takes a
longer time to cool down at night than the surrounding air and hence is
warmer than the air and tends to increase the UHI during nighttime in
summer [139,140].
Within the urban limit, water bodies should be strategically placed to
take wind and trees to improve the cooling performance of water in
surroundings [141]. Hence the evaporative cooling of the urban water
bodies also depends on the surrounding geometrical surfaces and
vegetation [142]. The cooling effect of the surrounding environment
increases when the distance between the water bodies and vegetation
decreases. The cooling effect of outdoor space depends on street ge­
ometry and river width [143]. The higher aspect ratio of street canyon
and wider river provides a lower PET.
Water generally reduces the temperature in subtropical, Mediterra­
nean, and other climates utilizing evaporation, heat flux between air and
water surface, and radiation absorption. In addition, the impact of
ventilation and movement of water influences the thermal effect of
water [144,145]. But in the tropical climate, the behavior of the water
body needs better understanding as it has different humidity and wind
condition compared to subtropical climate. Water bodies influence on
urban microclimate [146]. It was observed that PET reduction was
improved more by the urban geometry than the presence of water bodies
indicating less impact of water bodies on microclimate in a tropical
location. Especially, waterbodies are effective in hot and dry climates.
A quantitative study assessed the effect of multiple landscape ele­
ments on microclimate in high-rise urban residential areas in Singapore
[135]. A combined field and simulation experiment assessed thermal
comfort in seven different scenarios. It was observed that water bodies
had no effective result in reducing the heat stress, PET, air temperature,
MRT, and surface temperature of the surroundings in a tropical climate.
It might be due to the prevalence of high humidity and low wind speed
in the measured site; also, the water body might not be large enough to
U.K. Priya and R. Senthil
control the surrounding microclimate.
Several researchers analyzed the impact of larger water bodies like
waterways and rivers. A review of the river’s effect on urban microcli­
mate suggested that waterway’s influence on cooling effect depends on
various factors like building density, orientation, placement pattern,
street geometry, etc. Wind movement is an essential factor in improving
the cooling effect of waterways in tropical climates [147]. The tem­
perature reduction near a canal was assessed in the Kallang and Sungei
regions of Singapore. The waterway reduced air temperature merely by
0.1–0.2 ◦ C for every 30 m away from it. It indicated that air temperature
variation around water bodies is related to the distance [148]. A similar
study in Melaka observed that a temperature reduction by 0.25–0.30 ◦ C
every 25 m up to 50 m away from the waterway [149]. Beyond 50 m, the
cooling effect was comparatively lesser, but it occurred till 95 m.
Assessment of the effect of garden city concept in Putrajaya using
simulation of water bodies reduced the daily mean air temperature at 2
m by 0.14 ◦ C [150]. But it was less compared to the reduction by the
vegetation of 0.39 ◦ C. During the daytime, the thermal effect of water
bodies was less effective visibly than the vegetation. The water body also
had high temperature during night and morning due to high thermal
retention capacity extending uncomfortable conditions on the sur­
roundings, whereas trees had consistent cooling results.
When comparing thermal comfort in 4 different open spaces –
lakefront, parks, grasslands, and market lane in Bhopal showed that
lakefront measured PET of 39.9 ◦ C, which was lower than market lane
and open garden but is higher than parks which measured as 38.5 ◦ C
[57]. Participants observed lake front was slightly less comfortable in
thermal comfort. The use of water in building as a film on glazed walls
influenced the temperature of the interior in Malaysia [151]. Comparing
two test rooms with and without water film on glazed walls reduced the
surface temperature by 7.2–14 ◦ C and interior air temperature by
2.2–4.1 ◦ C. They suggested that water films can be used on east and west
façade in tropical climates, but the cost and humidity factors should be
considered to respective conditions. Roof water showering is used to
reduce the sensible heat of air and heat release from the building sur­
faces [152].
As observed in the literature, water bodies do not contribute much to
temperature reduction compared to greeneries. But the cooling effect of
waterbodies can be carried to the surroundings when proper ventilation
is provided. Larger waterbodies influence more temperature reduction
than smaller waterbodies. The impacts of waterbodies could be further
enhanced by employing trees to provide the additional cooling effect.
Fig. 8. Average temperature reduction by trees, GWs, and GRs.
11
Building and Environment 205 (2021) 108190
Urban planning is always better to locate spaces downwind to water
bodies with streets oriented perpendicular to it to allow the cooled air to
be taken to a longer distance than to design streets parallel to it and
block the wind movement.
4. Discussion
The UGI significantly contributes to reducing the temperature of the
urban environment, as seen from the comprehensive review of litera­
ture. The impact of trees is observed to be more at the street level than
the building scale, whereas GRs and GWs have a more significant effect
at the building scale than urban canyon level. When GRs and GWs are
applied on a large scale, they can mitigate the UHI effects at the urban
scale level. The combining of green elements produces better perfor­
mance and temperature control than a single element [66]. The thermal
reduction achieved by different types of UGI are as follows- Maximum
surface temperature reduction by VGS ranges from 4 to 11 ◦ C, maximum
air temperature reduction in VGS ranges from 3 to 11 ◦ C and for trees
ranges from 2 to 9 ◦ C and for GRs, the reduction is up to 4 ◦ C. GRs can
reduce the air temperature up to 3.5 ◦ C when compared to the non-GR
adjacent buildings in Dhaka City, Bangladesh [161]. The other advan­
tages of GRs are carbon sequestration (20–125 tons of carbon seques­
tration per hectare per annum) and lower discomfort index.
Fig. 8 shows the average temperature reduction with trees, GWs and
GRs in various parameters, as noted from literature. Trees play an
effective role in controlling the outdoor parameters, while GWs effec­
tively control indoor parameters. Though GR does offer higher OST
reduction, its effect on the number of parameters controlled is relatively
less than GWs and trees. It is observed from the literature that for the
successful application of the UGI in a tropical environment, it is vital to
consider certain factors like control parameters, for both indoors and
outdoors, proper selection of plant species, type of green infrastructure
to be used, orientation, etc.
Parameters of assessment - The main thermal comfort parameters
that define the outdoor thermal performance of a UGI are air tempera­
ture, PET, SET, and MRT. The main thermal comfort parameters that
help assess the indoor performance of a UGI are surface temperature,
heat flux, air temperature, and RH. The literature review indicates that
trees significantly influence the outdoor parameters, whereas VGS and
GRs have significant control over the surface and indoor parameters. Air
temperature acts as a standard parameter that defines the performance
of all the UGIs. The literature survey shows that the most influential
U.K. Priya and R. Senthil Building and Environment 205 (2021) 108190

parameter is outside air temperature (OAT), followed by IAT, OST, IST, Table 2
and RH. Shrubs, grasses, and water bodies do not contribute much to The modified selection criteria for VGS plant species in tropical climates [108].
thermal performance as an individual element. Factor Selection criteria Remarks
Considering orientation, it is observed that the greater the solar ra­
Growth rate Vigorous and Should be able to cover the required area in
diation, the better is the performance of green elements. Hence, the fast the given time
orientation of the green elements should be in such a way that they help Coverage Spreading
maximize solar radiation. A similar trend can be observed from litera­ Weather Full sun Should be able to tolerate complete sun
ture in a subtropical climate and Mediterranean climate locations like tolerance conditions to provide shading and to
withstand extreme weather conditions
China and Spain [12]. In humid conditions, the orientation should also Maintenance Low Low maintenance, watering, monitoring
consider the wind direction as optimum ventilation must overcome the requirements
discomfort caused by an increase in humidity caused by vegetations. The Leaf size Large Larger leaves provide better coverage and
most experimented orientation in a tropical climate is west, which re­ shading. Preferable to have planted with
higher LAI
ceives higher solar radiation followed by the south, north, and east.
Availability in Easily and Preferably native and local species that
Plant species selection is another essential factor to consider in urban nursery locally available withstand local climate and for easy
greening design. A higher LAI, more coverage, and a higher evapo­ availability for installation and replacement
transpiration rate should be preferred [152–155]. Researchers must
further explore plant materials with other temperature controlling
strategies like low albedo materials, cool roofs, and insulating panels and the building structures (Chan et al., 2021) [156]. Trees were found
[154]. Plants with more leaves, more height, and darker leaves show useful to decrease the air temperature by 3.1 ◦ C–5.8 ◦ C for all-weather
better performance. Tables 1, 3 and 4 show a wide range of tropical conditions due to the evapotranspiration of well-watered trees (Meili
species. Previous literature suggests that the plant selection process et al., 2021) [157]. The shading effect of trees reduced the surface
should also consider residents’ preferences as regular care and mainte­ temperature of buildings. Cheela et al. [158] discussed the causes of
nance are needed to ensure the effectiveness of the established green­ increasing surface temperature due to solar radiation and suggested
eries [155]. using reflective coatings, asphalts on pavements, and tree shading, and
The microclimate is influenced by trees, the dimensions of the park, urban forest systems to control the urban air temperatures.

Table 1
Studies on thermal performance of trees.
Location Type of work Species Effect of trees on microclimate Climate
Reference classification

[21] Syria Simulation Ulmus Americana That the difference between the base and best case Aw/Af/As
(base case with trees and shading device) in PET
value was 10.5 ◦ C and in SET value was up to 4.4 ◦ C
[51] Malaysia Experimental Dyera costulata, Mesua ferrea, Samanea saman, Brownea Hopeaodarata had a maximum thermal reduction Af
ariza, Khaya senegalensis, Milletia atropurpurea, Ficus of up to 9.2 ◦ C
benjamina, Callophyllum inophyllum, Melaleuca cajuputi,
Peltophorum pterocarpum, Hopea odorata
[54] Bhopal Experimental Azadirachta indica, Albezia lebbek, Delonix regia, Ficus 80 % coverage will reduce about 2.5 ◦ C of AT. Aw
religiosa, Peltophorum pterocarpum, Pterocarpus It lowered air temperature up to 2.1 ◦ C.
marsupium, Samanea saman, Alstonia scholaris, Artocarpus MRT reduction of 4.61 ◦ C
heterophyllus, Ficus benghalensis, Kigelia africana,
Magnifera indica, Pongamia pinnata, Schleichera oleosa,
Spathodea campanulata, Syzygiumcumini, Terminalia
tomentosa
[55] Nigeria Experimental – Scorching comfort level was observed for 2 h in Aw/Af/As
shaded and 5 h in unshaded building
[56] Malaysia Experimental Dalbergia oliveri, Inside air temperature reduction up to 4 ◦ C Af
Schizolobium parahyba
Samanea saman and Erythrina fusca
[57] Bhopal Experimental Ficus religiosa, Ficus benghalensis, Artocarpus Air temperatures in parks were 3.1 ◦ C, 0.4 ◦ C, Aw
heterophyllus, Peltophorum pterocarpum, Azadirachta 6.7 ◦ C cooler than a market, lakefront, and open
indica, Schleichera oleosa, Terminalia arjuna, grassland, respectively.
Neolamarckiacadamba, Magnifera indica, Spathodea The MRT reduction of 2.2 ◦ C due to 70 % tree
campanulata, Mimusops elengi, Pongamia piñata, Delonix cover.
regia The PET reduction was 2.6 ◦ C in 70 % tree cover
[58] Taiwan Experimental 79 different species A difference of about 9 ◦ C was observed in the Aw/Af/As
and simulation human comfort index called SET between shaded
and unshaded areas
[62] Malaysia Experimental Mesua ferrea Mesua ferrea with an LAI of 6.1 had better solar Af
and simulation Hura crepitans filtration of 93 % than Hura crepitans with an LAI
of 1.5 and solar filtration of 79 %
[63] Singapore Experimental – Mature trees had air temperature reduction up to Af
1.1 ◦ C
[64] Malaysia Experimental Ficus benjamina A high LAI of 9.7 along with cool material of albedo Af
and simulation 0.8 could reduce the average air temperature up to
2.7 ◦ C and maximum of 3.5 ◦ C and reduction in
building a cooling load up to 29 %
[66] Singapore Simulation – Green areas measured 1.5 ◦ C lower average air Af
temperature and energy-saving up to 10 %
reduction in cooling load
[68] Singapore Simulation – Reduced air temperature up to 0.7 ◦ C. MRT Af
reduced up to 40 ◦ C

12
U.K. Priya and R. Senthil Building and Environment 205 (2021) 108190

Table 3 Table 3 (continued )

The studies on the thermal effects of VGS. Reference Type of work, Cavity air Koppen Climate
Reference Type of work, Cavity air Koppen Climate and location Duration, temperature (CAT), (Aw, Af),
and location Duration, temperature (CAT), (Aw, Af), Type of VGS Reduction in classification,
Type of VGS Reduction in classification, system, indoor surface Energy-saving,
system, indoor surface Energy-saving, Orientation, temperature (IST), Plant species used
Orientation, temperature (IST), Plant species used Air cavity space, outdoor surface
Air cavity space, outdoor surface Comparison temperature (OST),
Comparison temperature (OST), reference indoor and outdoor
reference indoor and outdoor air temperatures
air temperatures (IST, OAT),
(IST, OAT), Relative humidity
Relative humidity (RH)
(RH)
indirect green 1.12 ◦ C in indirect Orchids, Dracaena
[71] The experimental- Cavity air Af. façade green façade reflexa, Ficus
Malaysia test box temperature Blue trumpet vine LW. 0.71 ◦ C in LW pumila, Ferns
3 days duration reduction up to East, West, north, RH increases by (Caledonium),
West orientation 6.5 ◦ C, south orientation 1.7 % in direct Thunergia laurifolia
Double skin green IST reduction by a Air cavity green façade, 1.6 % 10.97 MW energy-
façade maximum of 3.5 ◦ C space,5–130 cm in indirect green saving
Air cavity space of OST reduction by a A bare wall façade
5 cm maximum of 5.5 ◦ C reference 1.81 % in LW
A bare wall indoor air [85] Experimental OST reduction Af
reference temperature (IAT) Singapore Duration of 3 from 4 ◦ C to 11 ◦ C Phylanthus
reduction by a months OAT reduction up myrtifolius
maximum of 3 ◦ C LW, one double to 3.33 ◦ C Tradescantia
without ventilation skin green façade, spathacea
and 2.5 ◦ C with A bare wall
ventilation reference
[71] Experimental- test Cavity air Af. [87] A field experiment IAT reduction by Aw
Malaysia box temperature Blue trumpet vine Thailand in a room an average of Blue trumpet vine
3 days duration reduction up to Duration of 4 days 3.63 ◦ C and a
West orientation 8 ◦C Double skin green maximum of
Felt LW IST reduction by façade 9.93 ◦ C with
Air cavity space of maximum of 4 ◦ C West orientation ventilation
5 cm OST reduction by Air cavity space of RH increases by
A bare wall maximum of 6.3 ◦ C 70 cm 6.68 %
reference IAT reduction by A bare wall
maximum of 4 ◦ C reference
without ventilation [91] Experimental- field OST reduction up Af.
and 3.5 ◦ C with Malaysia buildings to 11 ◦ C Psophocarpus
ventilation Duration of 6 IAT reduction up to tetrogonobulus
[81] The experimental Cavity air Af. months 0.6 ◦ C
Indonesia –field house temperature Amaranthus hybridus Double skin green
Duration of 8 days reduction by an Brassica juncea façade
Air cavity space of average of 1 ◦ C in West orientation
100 cm Amaranthus Air cavity space of
Comparison Cavity air 40 cm
between plant temperature A bare wall
species reduction by an reference
average of 0.2 ◦ C in [100] Experimental IST reduction up to Af.
Brassica Indonesia Duration of 3 days 6.5 ◦ C. Passiflora flavicarva
IAT reduction by Green façade OST reduction up and Pseudocalym
an average of East orientation to 9.9 ◦ C. maalliaceum
1.2 ◦ C in A bare wall IAT reduction up to
Amaranthus and reference 1.9 ◦ C.
0.2 ◦ C in Brassica OAT reduction up
[82] Experimental- field IAT reduction by Af. to 5.7 ◦ C.
Malaysia buildings 2.3 ◦ C [103] Experimental OST reduction on Af.
Duration of 1 day OAT reduction by Malaysia Duration of 1 week average by 2.4 ◦ C Psophocarpus
GW system 2.55 ◦ C VGS and maximum of tetrogonobulus
Thana building A bare wall 6.4 ◦ C
without a green reference
wall [104] An experimental- IAT reduction by Af.
[83] Simulation IAT reduction up to Af Malaysia field experiment on an average of
Singapore LW 10 ◦ C in buildings Nephrolepis exaltat/ a corridor 0.8 ◦ C and
Air cavity space of with opaque walls Urechites lutea/ Duration of 5 days maximum of
10 cm Ophiopogon North orientation 11.9 ◦ C.
Different range of japonicus/ Modular LW RH increases by
vegetation Tradescantia Control wall 1.1 %
scenarios spathacea reference
10–31% cooling load [104] An experimental- IAT reduction by Af.
[84] Field experimental IAT reduction up to Af Malaysia field experiment on average of 0.6 ◦ C
Sri Lanka and simulation 2.4 ◦ C Crissie bird nest, a corridor and maximum of
Duration of 3 OAT reduction of Fruitzluthi Duration of 5 days 8.40 ◦ C.
months 0.91 ◦ C in direct maidenhair, North orientation RH increases by
Direct green façade green façade, Caledonium, and Double skin green 0.3 %
façade
(continued on next page)

13
U.K. Priya and R. Senthil Building and Environment 205 (2021) 108190

Table 3 (continued ) emission controls, and heat stress controls the UHI at the macro-level
Reference Type of work, Cavity air Koppen Climate [159]. Water-drought plants do not influence much on microclimate
and location Duration, temperature (CAT), (Aw, Af), [160]. The proper selection of greeneries and their combinations could
Type of VGS Reduction in classification, serve better in terms of maintaining the microclimate [162–165]. Car­
system, indoor surface Energy-saving, bon fluxes are controlled by green elements substantially as carbon
Orientation, temperature (IST), Plant species used
Air cavity space, outdoor surface
capture mechanisms and beneficial to the urban residents [166–168].
Comparison temperature (OST), The sustainable landscape and cities with a maximum possible green­
reference indoor and outdoor eries can minimize heat stress based human health issues in tropical
air temperatures urban cities [169,170].
(IST, OAT),
Relative humidity
(RH) 5. Recommendations on green landscape elements

Control wall
reference
The successful application of trees, VGS and GRs is vital for thermal
[105] Experimental IAT reduction up to Af control in both indoor and outdoor environments. Hence, future studies
Malaysia Duration of 1 1.5 ◦ C Thumbergia selecta should focus on the end-user’s preferences in selecting plant species and
month RH increases by 5 Ophiopogon planting systems for GWs to maintain temperature control. Thus, VGS
LW and green % verigated
could be the focus of future research works in countries like India. Few
façade
A bare wall recommendations are provided below to improve the deployment of
reference green landscape elements in tropical areas.
[107] Experimental and IST reduction of Af.
Sri Lanka simulation 3.31 ◦ C in LW Rhoeo spathacea and 5.1. Trees
LW, indirect green 2.32 ◦ C, OST Axonopus
façade, direct green reduction of compressus
façade 10.16 ◦ C in LW The recommendations concerning the use of trees for temperature
A bare wall 8.65 ◦ C., IAT control are provided below.
reference reduction of
2.11 ◦ C in LW
• Trees are an excellent wat to control outdoor thermal comfort to
OAT reduction by a
maximum of mitigate UHI and can be planted in a planned manner at places where
4.89 ◦ C from pedestrian thermal comfort is needed. Its influence on indoor tem­
simulation of LW perature control is relatively less than VGS.
[109] The experimental- IST reduction by an Aw. • Plant species with higher canopy density are observed to perform
Thailand test box. average of 0.67 ◦ C Cuphea hyssopifola,
Duration of 6 and maximum of Tibouchina
well. Species like Hopea odarata, Mesua ferrea, Ficus benjamina
months. 2.5 ◦ C. urvilleana, showed higher temperature reductions in their surroundings.
South orientation. OST reduction by Excoecaria • Trees with a dense canopy density of above 70 % should be selected
Modular LW. an average of cochinchinensis for higher temperature reduction and shading. They help to reduce
Air cavity space of 2.06 ◦ C and a
heat with higher evapotranspiration - trees with an LAI above six
5 cm. maximum of
A bare wall 7.2 ◦ C. show higher temperature reduction.
reference. IAT reduction by • Trees provide an additional cooling effect in combination with other
an average of 1 ◦ C elements like horizontal shading devices and low albedo materials.
and a maximum of • Overcrowding of plants should be avoided in pedestrian movement
3.3 ◦ C.
[110] A field experiment IST reduction in Af
areas as it deters the wind flow causing higher humidity and stagnant
Indonesia on building average of 2.1 ◦ C Phalaenopsis sp. air condition, which results in more human thermal discomfort.
Duration of 1 day, Dracaena warneckii • Compared to a single standalone tree in streets and open spaces, trees
Geotextile LW some climber plants with shrubs provide a more cooling effect and better control over the
system. East
UHI effect.
orientation, A bare
wall reference • To reduce the temperature at the neighborhood and city levels, due
[111] Experimental OST reduction up Af considerations must be given to dense, multi-layered vegetation
Singapore Duration of 3 to 6.7 ◦ C structures like a forest, and parks rather than only trees at street
months, LW MRT reduction up level.
to 12.8 ◦ C
• A highly dense canopy leads to poor solar radiation incidence and
vitamin-D deficiency allied health issues.
The increased humidity caused by plants in a closed place results in
human thermal discomfort. Natural ventilation decreases the thermal 5.2. Vertical greening systems (VGS)
performance but created a pleasant indoor environment by controlling
the humidity. Wind speed also helps in the reduction of interior surface The recommendations concerning the use of VGS for temperature
temperature. Street canyon level trees can be adopted as an effective control are stated below.
option of heat stress mitigation outside the building. When considering
building scale, VGS and GRs are noted to be effective. • VGS helps in indoor and envelope level temperature control.
The GW is a prominent element that controls most thermal comfort • Using VGS as façade material in buildings receiving higher solar
parameters, making it most suitable for mitigating heat stress at a radiation facilitates higher temperature reduction. The best orien­
microscale followed in order by trees and, at last GRs, as shown in Fig. 9. tation is west, followed by the south, east, and north directions in a
Since GRs are at the rooftop level, their influence on pedestrians and tropical climate.
indoors other than the top floor was relatively low. Comparing the • Plant species like Psophocarpus tetrogonobulus, Amaranthus
performance of VGS and GRs - VGS impact more indoor thermal building hybridus, Wisteria sinesis, and Anemopaegma chamberlayne are
environment than GRs as the area available for GWs is more than the GR. noted to show good performance in vertical gardens.
Combinations of green elements are required for temperature, CO2 • In places where the cost factor and maintenance are not constraints,
LW is a better option for thermal control.

14
U.K. Priya and R. Senthil Building and Environment 205 (2021) 108190

Table 4
Studies on the thermal performance of GRs.
Reference and Type of work and Type of GR Comparison Reduction in temperature Koppen Climate Plant type and species
location duration reference classification

[116] Simulation – Bare roof Temperature decreases 10–15 ◦ C expected on Af –

Sri Lanka the rooftop gardens
[117] Experimental, 6 Extensive Bare roof Reduction in surface temperature up to 18 ◦ C Af –
Singapore days GR
[120] Experimental, 3 – Bare roof Reduction in roof surface temperature to a Am –
Mauritius months maximum of 4 ◦ C
[121] Experimental, 6 – Bare roof IAT decrease-1.73 ◦ C Af Shrubs: Ipomoea pescapre
Malaysia days OST reduction - maximum 4.62 ◦ C
IST reduction - maximum 7.86 ◦ C
[122] Experimental, 5 Intensive Bare roof Maximum air temperature reduction - 1.3 ◦ C, Af Grass and flowering plants
Singapore days GR Maximum surface temperature reduction
− 15.3 ◦ C
[123] Modelling, – Cool roof GR had 2 ◦ C more temperature reduction Af –
Singapore 4 months than cool roof at night
[125] Experimental, 17 Intensive Bare roof The surface temperature was up to 30 ◦ C and Af Trees, shrubs: Heliconia,
Singapore days GR the ambient air temperature was up to 4.2 ◦ C Spider lily,
Ophiopogon, Raphis palm,
Pandanus, Erythrina
[129] Simulation, a day – GW, trees, exiting 1.76 ◦ C in 100 % GR 1,79 ◦ C in 50 % GR Af –
Sri Lanka vegetation
[130] 2-dimensional Extensive GW, Existing Surface temperature in an average up to Aw Grass
Multiple model GR vegetation 12.8 ◦ C in Riyadh and a maximum of 26.1 ◦ C
locations in Mumbai
[59] Experimental, 8 – Bare roof MRT reduction of 10 ◦ C Af Phyllanthus
Singapore months ochinchinensis,
Heliconia ‘american
Dwarf’,
Sphagnetic olatrilobata

Fig. 9. Control of thermal comfort parameters by trees, GWs, GRs.

• Proper ventilation and wind flow should be considered to avoid
discomfort caused by increased humidity, particularly in closed
places.
• VGS controls the outdoor microclimate up to 3 m in the front and
pedestrian comfort up to a height of 6 m beyond which its influence
is relatively less.
• When considering the thermal effects of VGS, the LW showed better
performance followed in order by direct and indirect systems.

15
U.K. Priya and R. Senthil
However, it requires regular and intensive care and has higher
installation and maintenance costs than the green facades.
• The air cavity in a VGS creates a microclimate between the sur­
rounding plants and wall surface, thus acting as insulation between
the two layers, thereby reducing the heat flux into the building. The
width of the air cavity used on average is between 0.5 m and 1 m.
5.3. Green roofs
The recommendations concerning the use of GRs for temperature
control are as follows.
• GR, when applied on a large scale, helps mitigate the impacts of UHI.
A GR in a single building provides fewer thermal benefits as its effect
is limited to the top floor and does not reach the lower and pedestrian
levels.
• Selection of species of higher evapotranspiration rate and lower al­
bedo than that of higher LAI is better.
• A GR requires regular maintenance and care to avoid sedimentation
and nutrient concentration.
5.4. Grass and shrubs
The recommendations concerning the use of grasses and shrubs for
temperature control are as follows.
• Using both shrubs and grasses has less impact on urban areas’ ther­
mal performance due to poor shading and a more negligible evapo­
transpiration effect.
• Grass can be used with trees to decrease the air temperatures
marginally and assists more wind movement to overcome high hu­
midity in a tropical location.
• When exposed to solar radiation, grasses as a standalone element will
require more water supply than grasses in the shade. At shady places,
proper ventilation is required to overcome high humidity levels.
• Shrubs can be used as a standalone element in shading the building
walls of lower height. Shrubs in combination with trees can reduce
more temperature, but it might deter wind movement, causing high
humidity.
• The selection parameters of grasses are essentially the albedo and
evapotranspiration rate to improve the thermal comfort in tropical
areas.
• Species like Axonopus compresses, Elusine coracana, Phyllanthus
cochinchinensis showed a better thermal performance in tropical
regions.
5.5. Waterbodies
The recommendations concerning the use of waterbodies for tem­
perature control are as follows.
• The smaller water bodies influence a slight temperature reduction
and thermal comfort in tropical climates. Further, the wind move­
ment around water bodies enhances the thermal comfort of nearby
places. The downwind side areas to the water bodies show a much
lesser temperature, and hence buildings can be located on the
leeward side of the water bodies.
• Also, the street landscaping can be oriented perpendicular to the
water bodies to carry the cooling wind to a longer distance.
• By combining water bodies with trees is used to achieve better
thermal comfort in tropical areas. Trees with surround water bodies
reduce the air temperature further by passing the air over the water
surface. It is essential to consider that the arrangement of the vege­
tation should assist the movement of the wind towards a better
microclimate.
16
Building and Environment 205 (2021) 108190
• Larger water bodies like lakes, rivers, and canals perform well in
temperature reduction than that smaller water bodies. Thus,
improving larger water bodies with selective vegetations and their
location should be more important in urban planning to attain
thermal comfort.
6. Conclusions
The vital role of UGI in moderating the microclimate of urban spaces
is evident from the present review. The UGI measures are aimed at
promoting the health and well-being of urban dwellers. UGI minimizes
the heat fluxes in the built environment and reduces the carbon fluxes.
Urban greening is also minimizing energy consumption of thermal
comfort and alleviating carbon emissions. It is essential to consider the
critical performance of landscape elements in the design phase of urban
areas. The concluding remarks are as follows.
• Trees provide better thermal comfort in outdoor spaces at an urban
canyon scale, with IAT and OAT reduced by up to 10 ◦ C and 12 ◦ C,
respectively.
• Trees are beneficial to the cooling of ambient air and CO2 emission
control in urban regions. Shading of trees is effective in controlling
the surface temperatures.
• Trees with optimal canopy cover and LAI provide distinct health
benefits and UV protection in addition to surface temperature
reduction and UHI mitigation.
• GWs greatly influence the temperature reduction of an individual
building and its surroundings than GRs and trees.
• GRs can cool the ambient air up to 3.5 ◦ C and annual carbon
sequestration potential of up to 125 tons of carbon per hectare in
tropical urban regions.
• Grasses and shrubs improve the microclimate when combined with
trees and other greeneries rather than deployed separately.
• Waterbodies ensure a better microclimate during daytime but have a
reverse effect during nighttime. The orientation of buildings must
hence be on the leeward side of large water bodies.
• Water bodies can reduce the air temperature at around 0.3 ◦ C per
every 30 m from the top surface of the water.
• Glazed walls with water film reduce the wall surface temperature up
to 14 ◦ C and IAT up to 4 ◦ C, respectively.
• The green landscape is beneficial for regulating the higher temper­
ature of urban environments in a sustainable manner in developing
countries.
There is also a great scope in retrofitting the existing urban spaces
with vegetation to control the urban environment’s heat stress. Though
plant materials reduce the temperature of indoor and outdoor environ­
ments, several other environmental factors are also to be considered for
human thermal comfort. Hence, future research should correlate the
temperature reduction level with the users’ thermal comfort range using
multiple UGIs and other temperature control methods and materials like
panels, low albedo materials, orientations, structural designs, etc. A few
of them are as follows.
• Apart from temperature reduction, it is also essential to understand
the lifecycle cost and maintenance of green landscape elements for
successful applications to minimize the effects of climate change
through a comfortable microclimate.
• End-user preferences need to be considered, which is lacking in
selecting plant materials, making it a less preferred option by people
facing maintenance, cost, and water issues.
• Clear governmental regulations on VGS and incentives promoting
such schemes will improve the deployment of green landscape ele­
ments in urban infrastructure.
A multidisciplinary approach is essential to quantify the effects of
U.K. Priya and R. Senthil
green elements on energy and environments, including the solar ge­
ometry, atmospheric conditions, wind patterns, climates and seasons,
plantations, and social activities.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
U. Kaaviya Priya: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Methodol­
ogy, Data visualization, Investigation, Draft-writing, R. Senthil:
Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Methodology, Data visualization,
Data validation, Writing - review & editing, Supervision.
Funding information
This work received no specific grant from any funding agency in
public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgments
The authors are grateful to the SRM Institute of Science and Tech­
nology, Kattankulathur Campus, Chennai, for supplying the required
research facility.
References
[1] Z. Yu, G. Yang, S. Zuo, G. Jørgensen, M. Koga, Critical review on the cooling
effect of urban blue-green space: a threshold size perspective, Urban For. Urban
Gree. Urban For. Urban Gree. 49 (2020) 126630, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ufug.2020.126630.
[2] H.M.P.I.K. Herath, R.U. Halwatura, G.Y. Jayasinghe, Evaluation of green
infrastructure effects on tropical Sri Lankan urban context as an urban heat island
adaptation strategy, Urban For. Urban Gree. 29 (2018) 212–222, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.ufug.2017.11.013.
[3] UN-DESA, United Nations, World Urbanization Prospects: the 2014 Revision,
Highlights (ST/ESA/SER.A/352), United Nations DoEaSA, Population Division,
New York, 2014. https://population.un.org/wup/Publications/Files/WUP
2014-Highlights.pdf.
[4] H. Nagendra, X. Bai, E.S. Brondizio, S. Lwasa, The urban south and the
predicament of global sustainability, Nature Sustainability 1 (2018) 341–349,
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0101-5.0.
[5] X.P. Song, M.C. Hansen, S.V. Stehman, P.V. Potapov, A. Tyukavina, E.F. Vermote,
J.R. Townshend, Global land change from 1982 to 2016, Nature 560 (2018)
639–643, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0411-9.
[6] L. Pan, L.M. Chu, Energy saving potential and life cycle environmental impacts of
a vertical greenery system in Hong Kong: a case study, Build. Environ. 96 (2016)
291–300, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2015.06.033.
[7] CNN, Extreme weather-India heat wave kills 2330 people as millions wait for
rain, Retrieved, http://edition.cnn.com/2015/06/01/asia/india-heat-wav
e-deaths/, 2015. (Accessed 16 September 2015).
[8] D.E. Bowler, L.B. Ali, T.M. Knight, A.S. Pullin, Urban greening to cool towns and
cities: a systematic review of the empirical evidence, Landsc. Urban Plann. 97
(2010) 147–155, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2010.05.006.
[9] S. Völker, H. Baumeister, T. Claßen, C. Hornberg, T. Kistemann, Evidence for the
temperature-mitigating capacity of urban blue space – a health geographic
perspective, Erdkunde 67 (2013) 355–371, https://doi.org/10.3112/
erdkunde.2013.04.05, 04.
[10] G. Pérez, J. Coma, S. Sol, L.F. Cabeza, Green facade for energy savings in
buildings: the influence of leaf area index and facade orientation on the shadow
effect, Appl. Energy 187 (2017) 424–437, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
apenergy.2016.11.055.
[11] M. Haggag, A. Hassan, S. Elmasry, Experimental study on reduced heat gain
through green façades in a high heat load climate, Energy Build. 82 (2014)
668–674, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2014.07.087.
[12] H. Yin, F. Kong, A. Middel, I. Dronova, H. Xu, P. James, Cooling effect of direct
green façades during hot summer days: an observational study in Nanjing, China
using TIR and 3DPC data, Build. Environ. 116 (2017) 195–206, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.buildenv.2017.02.020.
[13] I. Jaffal, S.E. Ouldboukhitine, R. Belarbi, A comprehensive study of the impact of
green roofs on building energy performance, Renew. Energy 43 (2012) 157–164,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2011.12.004.
[14] T. Karlessi, M. Santamouris, A. Synnefa, D. Assimakopoulos, P. Didaskalopoulos,
K. Apostolakis, Development and testing of PCM doped cool colored coatings to
17
Building and Environment 205 (2021) 108190
mitigate urban heat island and cool buildings, Build. Environ. 46 (3) (2011)
570–576, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2010.09.003.
[15] F. Yang, F. Yuan, F. Qian, Z. Zhuang, J. Yao, Summertime thermal and energy
performance of a double-skin green facade: a case study in Shanghai, Sustain.
Cities Soc. 39 (2018) 43–51, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2018.01.049.
[16] C.B. Koc, P. Osmond, A. Peters, Evaluating the cooling effects of green
infrastructure: a systematic review of methods, indicators and data sources, Sol.
Energy 166 (2018) 486–508, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2018.03.008.
[17] J. Park, J.H. Kim, B. Dvorak, D.K. Lee, The role of green roofs on microclimate
mitigation effect to local climates in summer, Int. J. Environ. Res. 12 (2018)
671–679, https://doi.org/10.1007/s41742-018-0124-9.
[18] J. Park, J.H. Kim, D.K. Lee, C.Y. Park, S.G. Jeong, The influence of small green
space type and structure at the street level on urban heat island mitigation, Urban
For. Urban Gree. 21 (2017) 203–212, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ufug.2016.12.005.
[19] Z.H. Wang, X. Zhao, J. Yang, J. Song, Cooling and energy saving potentials of
shade trees and urban lawns in a desert city, Appl. Energy 161 (2016) 437–444,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.10.047.
[20] D. Govindarajulu, Urban green space planning for climate adaptation in Indian
cities, Urban Clim. 10 (2014) 35–41, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
uclim.2014.09.006.
[21] M.W. Yahia, E. Johansson, Landscape interventions in improving thermal comfort
in the hot dry city of Damascus, Syria—the example of residential spaces with
detached buildings, Landsc. Urban Plann. 125 (2014) 1–16, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.01.014.
[22] C.Y. Jim, Thermal performance of climber greenwalls: effects of solar irradiance
and orientation, Appl. Energy 154 (2015) 631–643, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
apenergy.2015.05.077.
[23] J. Lu, Q. Li, L. Zeng, J. Chen, G. Liu, Y. Li, W. Li, K. Huang, A micro-climatic study
on cooling effect of an urban park in a hot and humid climate, Sustain. Cities Soc.
32 (2017) 513–522, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2017.04.017.
[24] G. Manoli, S. Fatichi, M. Schläpfer, K. Yu, T.W. Crowther, N. Meili, P. Burlando,
G.G. Katul, E. Bou-Zeid, Magnitude of urban heat islands largely explained by
climate and population, Nature 573 (2019) 55–60, https://doi.org/10.1038/
s41586-019-1512-9.
[25] L. Zhao, X. Lee, R.B. Smith, K. Oleson, Strong contributions of local background
climate to urban heat islands, Nature 51 (1) (2014) 216–219, https://doi.org/
10.1038/nature13462.
[26] J.A. Acero, E.J.Y. Koh, X.X. Li, L.A. Ruefenacht, G. Pignatta, L.K. Norford,
Thermal impact of the orientation and height of vertical greenery on pedestrians
in a tropical area, Build. Simul. 12 (2019) 973–984, https://doi.org/10.1007/
s12273-019-0537-1.
[27] Z. Yu, S. Xu, Y. Zhang, G. Jørgensen, H. Vejre, Strong contributions of local
background climate to the cooling effect of urban green vegetation, Sci. Rep. 8
(2018) 6798, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-25296-w.
[28] W. Zhou, J. Wang, M.L. Cadenasso, Effects of the spatial configuration of trees on
urban heat mitigation: a comparative study, Remote Sens. Environ. 195 (2017)
1–12, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2017.03.043.
[29] B. Raji, M.J. Tenpierik, A.V.D. Dobbelsteen, The impact of greening systems on
building energy performance: a literature review, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 45
(2015) 610–623, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.02.011.
[30] M.C. Peel, B.L. Finlayson, T.A. Mcmahon, Updated world map of the Köppen-
Geiger climate classification, Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 11 (2007) 1633–1644,
https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-11-1633-2007.
[31] R. Emmanuel, Achieving Thermal Pleasure in Tropical Urban Outdoors, Book:
Urban Climate Challenges in the Tropics, 2016, pp. 31–47, https://doi.org/
10.1142/9781783268412_0002.
[32] C.S.B. Grimmond, M. Roth, T.R. Oke, Y.C. Au, M. Best, et al., Climate and more
sustainable cities: climate information for improved planning and management of
cities (Producers/Capabilities perspectives), Procedia Environ. Sci. 1 (2010)
247–274, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proenv.2010.09.016.
[33] K. Yeang, Book: ECODESIGN: A Manual for Ecological Design, John Wiley and
Sons, Ltd., 2006.
[34] K.C. Dahanayak, C.L. Chow, Passive energy performance of vertical greenery
systems (VGS) under different climatic conditions, Sustain. Energy Build. 131
(2018) 277–286, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04293-6_28.
[35] H. Sarmento, New paradigms in tropical limnology: the importance of the
microbial food web, Hydrobiologia 686 (2012) 1–14, https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10750-012-1011-6.
[36] A.G. Regamey, M.G. Torres, A. Dissegna, B. Weibel, How urban densification
influences ecosystem services—a comparison between a temperate and a tropical
city, Environ. Res. Lett. 15 (2020), 075001, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/
ab7acf.
[37] S.K.S.O. Thani, N.H.N. Mohamad, S. Idilfitri, Modification of urban temperature
in hot-humid climate through landscape design approach: a review, Procedia Soc.
Behav. Sci. 68 (2012) 439–450, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.12.240.
[38] J. Coma, G. Perez, A.D. Gracia, S. Bures, M. Urrestarazu, L.F. Cabeza, Vertical
greenery systems for energy savings in buildings: a comparative study between
green walls and green facades, Build. Environ. 111 (2017) 228–237, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.11.014.
[39] Y. Wang, Z. Ni, M. Hu, J. Li, Y. Wang, Z. Lu, S. Chen, B. Xia, Environmental
performances and energy efficiencies of various urban green infrastructures: a
life-cycle assessment, J. Clean. Prod. 248 (2020) 119244, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119244.
U.K. Priya and R. Senthil
[40] W.N. Hien, C. Yu, Study of green areas and urban heat island in a tropical city,
Habitat Int. 29 (2005) 547–558, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
habitatint.2004.04.008.
[41] T. Honjo, T. Takakura, Simulation of thermal effects of urban green areas on their
surrounding areas, Energy Build. 15 (1990) 443–446, https://doi.org/10.1016/
0378-7788(90)90019-F.
[42] T. Safikhani, A.M. Abdullah, D.R. Ossen, M. Baharvand, A review of energy
characteristic of vertical greenery systems, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 40
(2014) 450–462, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.07.166.
[43] D.R. Richards, T.K. Fung, R.N. Belcher, P.J. Edwards, Differential air temperature
cooling performance of urban vegetation types in the tropics, Urban For. Urban
Gree. 50 (2020) 126651, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126651.
[44] M. Radic, M.B. Dodig, T. Auer, Green facades and living walls—a review
establishing the classification of construction types and mapping the benefits,
Sustainability 11 (17) (2019) 4579, https://doi.org/10.3390/su11174579.
[45] B.A. Norton, A.M. Coutts, S.J. Livesley, R.J. Harris, A.M. Hunter, N.S.G. Williams,
Planning for cooler cities: a framework to prioritise green infrastructure to
mitigate high temperatures in urban landscapes, Landsc. Urban Plann. 134 (2015)
127–138, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.10.018.
[46] Y. Wang, F. Bakker, R. Groot, H. Wörtche, Effect of ecosystem services provided
by urban green infrastructure on indoor environment: a literature review, Build.
Environ. 77 (2014) 88–100, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2014.03.021.
[47] W. Jaung, L.R. Carrasco, S.F.E.A. Shaikh, P.Y. Tan, D.R. Richard, Temperature
and air pollution reductions by urban green spaces are highly valued in a tropical
city-state, Urban For. Urban Gree. 55 (2020) 126827, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ufug.2020.126827.
[48] A. Medl, R. Stangl, F. Florineth, Vertical greening systems – a review on recent
technologies and research advancement, Build. Environ. 125 (2017) 227–239,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2017.08.054.
[49] A. Hami, B. Abdi, D. Zarehaghi, S.B. Maulan, Assessing the thermal comfort
effects of green spaces: a systematic review of methods, parameters, and plants’
attributes, Sustain. Cities Soc. 49 (2019) 101634, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
scs.2019.101634.
[50] J. Zhang, Z. Gou, L. Shutter, Effects of internal and external planning factors on
park cooling intensity: field measurement of urban parks in Gold Coast, Australia,
AIMS Environ. Sci. 6 (6) (2019) 417–434, https://doi.org/10.3934/
environsci.2019.6.417.
[51] Z.A. Rashid, S.A.M.A. Junid, S.K.S.O. Thani, Trees’ cooling effect on surrounding
air temperature monitoring system: implementation and observation, Int. J.
Simulat. Syst. Sci. Technol. 15 (2) (2014) 70–77, https://doi.org/10.5013/
IJSSST.a.15.02.10.
[52] H.H. Liang, K.T. Huang, Study on rooftop outdoor thermal environment and slab
insulation performance of grass planted roof, Phys. Sci. Int. J. 6 (1) (2011) 65–73,
https://doi.org/10.5897/IJPS10.664.
[53] N. Kántor, J. Unger, The most problematic variable in the course of human-
biometeorological comfort assessment — the mean radiant temperature, Cent.
Eur. J. Geosci. 3 (2011) 90–100, https://doi.org/10.2478/s13533-011-0010-x.
[54] S.B. Ali, S. Patnaik, Assessment of the impact of urban tree canopy on
microclimate in Bhopal: a devised low-cost traverse methodology, Urban Clim. 27
(2019) 430–445, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2019.01.004.
[55] T.E. Morakinyo, O.B. Adegun, A.A. Balogun, The effect of vegetation on indoor
and outdoor thermal comfort conditions: evidence from a microscale study of two
similar urban buildings in Akure, Nigeria, Indoor Built Environ. 25 (2014)
603–617, https://doi.org/10.1177/F1420326X14562455.
[56] A. Misni, The impact of vegetation on thermal performance, Asian J. Behav. Stud.
3 (11) (2018) 147–156, https://doi.org/10.21834/ajbes.v3i11.110.
[57] S.B. Ali, S. Patnaik, Thermal comfort in urban open spaces: objective assessment
and subjective perception study in tropical city of Bhopal, India, Urban Clim. 24
(2018) 954–967, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2017.11.006.
[58] C.M. Hsieh, F.C. Jan, L. Zhang, A simplified assessment of how tree allocation,
wind environment, and shading affect human comfort, Urban For. Urban Gree. 18
(2016) 126–137, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2016.05.006.
[59] C.L. Tan, W.N. Hein, P.Y. Tan, S.K. Jusuf, Z.Q. Chiam, Impact of plant
evapotranspiration rate and shrub albedo on temperature reduction in the
tropical outdoor environment, Build. Environ. 94 (2015) 206–217, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2015.08.001.
[60] N. Meili, J.A. Acero, N. Peleg, G. Manoli, P. Burlando, S. Fatichi, Vegetation cover
and plant-trait effects on outdoor thermal comfort in a tropical city, Build.
Environ. 195 (2021) 107733, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2021.107733.
[61] P.K. Latha, Y. Darshana, V. Venugopal, Role of building material in thermal
comfort in tropical climates - a review, J. Build. Eng. 3 (2015) 104–113, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2015.06.003.
[62] M.F. Shahidan, M.K.M. Shariff, P. Jones, E. Salleh, A.M. Abdullah, A comparison
of Mesua ferrea L. and Huracrepitans L. for shade creation and radiation
modification in improving thermal comfort, Landsc. Urban Plann. 97 (3) (2010)
168–181, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2010.05.008.
[63] W.N. Hien, S.K. Jusuf, Study on the microclimate condition along a green
pedestrian canyon in Singapore, Architect. Sci. Rev. 53 (2) (2010) 196–212,
https://doi.org/10.3763/asre.2009.0029.
[64] M.F. Shahidan, P.J. Jones, J. Gwilliam, E. Salleh, An evaluation of outdoor and
building environment cooling achieved through combination modification of
trees with ground materials, Build. Environ. 58 (2012) 245–257, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.buildenv.2012.07.012.
[65] E. Jamei, D.R. Ossen, M. Seyedmahmoudian, M. Sandanayake, A. Stojcevski,
B. Horan, Urban design parameters for heat mitigation in tropics, Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 134 (2020) 110362, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.110362.
18
Building and Environment 205 (2021) 108190
[66] C. Yu, W.N. Hien, Thermal benefits of city parks, Energy Build. 38 (2006)
105–120, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2005.04.003.
[67] S. Leuzinger, R. Vogt, C. Körner, Tree surface temperature in an urban
environment, Agric. For. Meteorol. 150 (1) (2010) 56–62, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.agrformet.2009.08.006.
[68] W. Yang, W.N. Hien, C.Q. Li, Effect of street design on outdoor thermal comfort in
an urban street in Singapore, J. Urban Plann. Dev. 142 (2015), https://doi.org/
10.1061/(ASCE)UP.1943-5444.0000285.
[69] E.G. McPherson, D.J. Nowak, R.A. Rowntree, Chicago’s Urban Forest Ecosystem:
Results of the Chicago Urban Forest Climate Project, Forest Service, U.S. Dept. of
Agriculture, 1994, https://doi.org/10.2737/NE-GTR-186.
[70] H. Akbari, M. Pomerantz, H. Taha, Cool surfaces and shade trees to reduce energy
use and improve air quality in urban areas, Sol. Energy 70 (3) (2001) 295–310,
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0038-092X(00)00089-X.
[71] T. Safikhani, M. Baharvand, A.M. Abdullah, D.R. Ossen, Thermal impacts of
vertical greenery systems, Environ. Clim. Technol. 14 (1) (2014) 5–11, https://
doi.org/10.1515/rtuect-2014-0007.
[72] E.A. Eumorfopoulou, K.J. Kontoleon, Experimental approach to the contribution
of plant-covered walls to the thermal behaviour of building envelopes, Build.
Environ. 44 (2009) 1024–1038, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
buildenv.2008.07.004.
[73] R. Fioretti, A. Palla, L.G. Lanza, P. Principi, Green roof energy and water related
performance in the Mediterranean climate, Build. Environ. 45 (2010) 1890–1904,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2010.03.001.
[74] H. Feng, K. Hewage, Lifecycle assessment of living walls: air purification and
energy performance, J. Clean. Prod. 69 (2014) 91–99, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jclepro.2014.01.041.
[75] H.F. Castleton, V. Stovin, S.B.M. Beck, J.B. Davison, Green roofs; building energy
savings and the potential for retrofit, Energy Build. 42 (2010) 1582–1591,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2010.05.004.
[76] G. Vox, I. Blanco, E. Schettini, Green façades to control wall surface temperature
in buildings, Build. Environ. 129 (2017) 154–166, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
buildenv.2017.12.002.
[77] L.S.H. Lee, C.Y. Jim, Subtropical summer thermal effects of wirerope climber
green walls with different air-gap depths, Build. Environ. 126 (2017) 1–12,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2017.09.021.
[78] K. Perini, M. Ottelé, Designing green façades and living wall systems for
sustainable constructions, Int. J. Des. Nat. 9 (1) (2014) 31–46, https://doi.org/
10.2495/DNE-V9-N1-31-46.
[79] A.B. Besir, E. Cuce, Green roofs and facades: a comprehensive review, Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 82 (2018) 915–939, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
rser.2017.09.106.
[80] G. Pérez, J. Coma, I. Martorell, L.F. Cabeza, Vertical Greenery Systems (VGS) for
energy saving in buildings: a review, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 39 (2014)
139–165, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.07.055.
[81] A.M. Nugroho, Vertical landscape for passive cooling in tropical house, Procedia
Environ. Sci. 20 (2014) 141–145, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
proenv.2014.03.019.
[82] A.H. Othman, N. Sahidin, Vertical greening façade as passive approach in
sustainable design, Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 222 (2016) 845–854, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.05.185.
[83] W.N. Hien, A.Y.K. Tan, P.Y. Tan, N.C. Wong, Energy simulation of vertical
greenery systems, Energy Build. 41 (12) (2009) 1401–1408, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.enbuild.2009.08.010.
[84] R.U. Galagoda, G.Y. Jayasinghe, R.U. Halwatura, H.T. Rupasinghe, The impact of
urban green infrastructure as a sustainable approach towards tropical micro-
climatic changes and human thermal comfort, Urban For. Urban Gree. 34 (2018)
1–9, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2018.05.008.
[85] W.N. Hien, A.Y.K. Tan, Y. Chen, K. Sekar, P.Y. Tan, D. Chan, K. Chiang, N.
C. Wong, Thermal evaluation of vertical greenery systems for building walls,
Build. Environ. 45 (3) (2010) 663–672, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
buildenv.2009.08.005.
[86] A.M.A. Rahman, F.S. Yeok, A.F. Amir, The building thermal performance and
carbon sequestration evaluation for psophocarpustetrogonobulus on biofaçade
wall in the tropical environment, Int. J. Environ. Ecol. Eng. 5 (4) (2011), https://
doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1332500.
[87] P. Sunakorn, C. Yimprayoon, Thermal performance of biofacade with natural
ventilation in the tropical climate, Procedia Eng. 21 (2011) 34–41, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.proeng.2011.11.1984.
[88] K. Perini, M. Ottelé, Vertical greening systems: contribution to thermal behaviour
on the building envelope and environmental sustainability, Conference: WIT
Trans. Ecol. Environ. 165 (2013) 239–250, https://doi.org/10.2495/ARC120221.
[89] R.A. Bustami, M. Belusko, J. Ward, S. Beecham, Vertical greenery systems: a
systematic review of research trends, Build. Environ. 146 (2018) 226–237,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.09.045.
[90] R. Kumar, S.C. Kaushik, Performance evaluation of green roof and shading for
thermal protection of buildings, Build. Environ. 40 (11) (2005) 1505–1511,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2004.11.015.
[91] A. Rahman, C. Wang, A.M. Rahim, S.C. Loo, N. Miswan, Vertical greenery system
(VGS) in urban tropics, Open House Int. 39 (2014) 42–52, https://doi.org/
10.1108/OHI-04-2014-B0005.
[92] A.M. Hunter, N.S.G. Williams, J.P. Rayner, L. Aye, D. Hes, S.J. Livesley,
Quantifying the thermal performance of green façades: a critical review, Ecol.
Eng. 63 (2014) 102–113, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2013.12.021.
[93] I. Susorova, Green facades and living walls: vertical vegetation as a construction
material to reduce building cooling loads, Book: eco-Efficient Materials for
U.K. Priya and R. Senthil
Mitigating Building Cooling Needs, 2015, pp. 127–153, https://doi.org/10.1016/
B978-1-78242-380-5.00005-4.
[94] K. Gunawardena, K. Steemers, Living walls in indoor environments, Build.
Environ. 148 (2018) 478–487, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.11.014.
[95] J. Erwin, J. Hensley, Plants with horticultural and ecological attributes for green
roofs in a cool, dry climate, Hortscience 54 (10) (2019) 1703–1711, https://doi.
org/10.21273/hortsci13893-19.
[96] I. Susorova, P. Azimi, B. Stephens, The effects of climbing vegetation on the local
microclimate, thermal performance, and air infiltration of four building facade
orientations, Build. Environ. 76 (2014) 113–124, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
buildenv.2014.03.011.
[97] G. Vox, I. Blanco, S. Fuina, C.A. Campiotti, G. Scarascia, E. Schettini, Evaluation
of wall surface temperatures in green facades, Eng.Sustai. 170 (6) (2016), https://
doi.org/10.1680/jensu.16.00019.
[98] I. Susorova, M. Angulo, P. Bahrami, B. Stephens, A model of vegetated exterior
facades for evaluation of wall thermal performance, Build. Environ. 67 (2013)
1–13, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2013.04.027.
[99] R. Widiastuti, E. Prianto, W.S. Budi, Investigation on the thermal performance of
green facade in tropical climate based on the modelling experiment, Int. J. Arch.
Eng. Construct. 7 (2018) 26–33, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.03.086.
[100] R. Widiastuti, J. Zaini, W. Caesarendra, Field measurement on the model of green
facade systems and its effect to building indoor thermal comfort, Measurement
166 (2020) 108212, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2020.108212.
[101] S.M. Zaid, E. Perisamy, H. Hussein, N.K. Myeda, N. Zainon, Vertical Greenery
System in urban tropical climate and its carbon sequestration potential: a review,
Ecol. Indicat. 91 (2018) 57–70, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.03.086.
[102] C.Y. Jim, Assessing growth performance and deficiency of climber species on
tropical greenwalls, Landsc. Urban Plann. 137 (2015) 107–121, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.01.001.
[103] H.S. Basher, S.S. Ahmad, A.M.A. Rahman, N.Q. Zaman, The use of edible vertical
greenery system to improve thermal performance in a tropical climate, J. Mech.
Eng. 13 (1) (2016) 58–66.
[104] B. Jaffar, I.B. Said, M.N. M Reba, M.H. Rasidi, An Experimental Study on
Bioclimatic Design of Vertical Greenery Systems in the Tropical Climate, Book,
The Malaysia-Japan Model on Technology Partnership, 2015, pp. 369–376,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-4-431-54439-5_37.
[105] B. Jaffar, I.B. Said, M.N. M Reba, M.H. Rasidi, Impact of vertical greenery system
on internal building corridors in the tropic, Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 105 (2013)
558–568, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.11.059.
[106] W.N. Hien, A.Y.K. Tan, P.Y. Tan, A. Sia, N.C. Wong, Perception studies of vertical
greenery systems in Singapore, J. Urban Plann. Dev. 136 (4) (2010), https://doi.
org/10.1061/(ASCE)UP.1943-5444.0000034.
[107] H.T. Rupasinghe, R.U. Halwatura, Benefits of implementing vertical greening in
tropical climates, Urban For. Urban Gree. 53 (2020) 126708, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126708.
[108] M.K.A.M. Sulaiman, M. Jamil, M.F.M. Zain, W. Kuttler, Shading performance of
tropical climbing plant: anemopaegmachamberlaynii on green façade,
Conference, in: International Sustainable Tropical Environmental Design
Conference 2013, SusTED’13, 2013, pp. 13–19.
[109] S. Charoenkit, S. Yiemwattana, Role of specific plant characteristics on thermal
and carbon sequestration properties of living walls in tropical climate, Build.
Environ. 115 (2017) 67–79, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2017.01.017.
[110] R. Widiastuti, E. Prianto, W.S. Budi, Performance evaluation of vertical gardens,
Int. J. Arch. Eng. Construct. 5 (1) (2016) 13–20, https://doi.org/10.7492/
IJAEC.2016.002.
[111] C.L. Tan, W.N. Hein, S.K. Jusuf, Effects of vertical greenery on mean radiant
temperature in the tropical urban environment, Landsc. Urban Plann. 127 (2014)
52–64, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.04.005.
[112] Z. Huang, Y. Lu, W.N. Hien, C.H. Poh, The true cost of “greening” a building: life
cycle cost analysis of vertical greenery systems (VGS) in tropical climate, J. Clean.
Prod. 228 (2019) 437–454, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.275.
[113] M. Manso, I. Teotónio, C.M. Silva, C.O. Cruz, Green roof and green wall benefits
and costs: a review of the quantitative evidence, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 135
(2021) 110111, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.110111.
[114] L.F.M. Francis, M.B. Jensen, Benefits of green roofs: a systematic review of the
evidence for three ecosystem services, Urban For. Urban Gree. 28 (2017)
167–176, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2017.10.015.
[115] N. Kamarulzaman, S.Z. Hashim, H. Hashim, A.A. Saleh, Green roof concepts as a
passive cooling approach in tropical climate- an overview, in: E3S Web of
Conferences 3, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/20140301028.
[116] R.U. Halwatura, M.T.R. Jayasinghe, Strategies for improved micro-climates in
high-density residential developments in tropical climates, Energy Sustain. Dev.
11 (2007) 54–65, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0973-0826(08)60410-X.
[117] W.N. Hien, T.P. Yok, C. Yu, Study of thermal performance of extensive rooftop
greenery systems in the tropical climate, Build. Environ. 42 (2007) 25–54,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2005.07.030.
[118] W.N. Hien, Y. Chen, C.L. Ong, A. Sia, Investigation of thermal benefits of rooftop
garden in the tropical environment, Build. Environ. 38 (2003) 261–270, https://
doi.org/10.1016/S0360-1323(02)00066-5.
[119] G. Zhang, B.J. He, Z. Zhu, B.J. Dewancker, Impact of morphological
characteristics of green roofs on pedestrian cooling in subtropical climates, Int. J.
Environ. Res. Publ. Health 16 (2) (2019) 179, https://doi.org/10.3390/
ijerph16020179.
[120] M. Mungur, Y. Poorun, D. Juggurnath, Y.B. Ruhomally, et al., A numerical and
experimental investigation of the effectiveness of green roofs in tropical
19
Building and Environment 205 (2021) 108190
environments: the case study of Mauritius in mid and late winter, Energy 202
(2020) 117608, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2020.117608.
[121] A. Ismail, M.H.A. Samad, A.M.A. Rahman, F.S. Yeok, Cooling potentials and CO2
uptake of Ipomoea pes-caprae installed on the flat roof of a single storey
residential building in Malaysia, Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 35 (2012) 361–368,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.02.099.
[122] X. Qin, X. Wu, Y.M. Chiew, Y. Li, A green roof test bed for stormwater
management and reduction of urban heat island effect in Singapore, Br. J.
Environ. Clim. Change 2 (4) (2012) 410–420, https://doi.org/10.9734/BJECC/
2012/2704.
[123] X.X. Li, L.K. Norford, Evaluation of cool roof and vegetations in mitigating urban
heat island in a tropical city, Singapore, Urban Clim. 16 (2016) 59–74, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2015.12.002.
[124] J. Yang, D.I.M. Kumar, A. Pyrgou, A. Chong, M. Santamouris, D. Kolokotsa, S.
E. Lee, Green and cool roofs’ urban heat island mitigation potential in tropical
Climate, Sol. Energy 173 (2018) 597–609, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
solener.2018.08.006.
[125] W.N. Hien, S.F. Tay, R. Wong, C.L. Ong, A. Sia, Life cycle cost analysis of rooftop
gardens in Singapore, Build. Environ. 38 (2003) 499–509, https://doi.org/
10.1016/S0360-1323(02)00131-2.
[126] C.F. Chen, Performance evaluation and development strategies for green roofs in
Taiwan: a review, Ecol. Eng. 52 (2013) 51–58, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ecoleng.2012.12.083.
[127] C.F. Chen, S.F. Kang, Effects of substrates and plant species on water quality of
extensive green roofs, Appl. Ecol. Environ. Res. 14 (2016) 77–91, https://doi.org/
10.15666/aeer/1402_077091.
[128] K. Vijayaraghavan, Green roofs: a critical review on the role of components,
benefits, limitations and trends, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 57 (2016) 740–752,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.12.119.
[129] H.M.P.I.K. Herath, R.U. Halwatura, G.Y. Jayasinghe, Modeling a tropical urban
context with green walls and green roofs as an urban heat island adaptation
strategy, Procedia Eng. 212 (2018) 691–698, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
proeng.2018.01.089.
[130] E. Alexandri, P. Jones, Temperature decreases in an urban canyon due to green
walls and green roofs in diverse climates, Build. Environ. 43 (2008) 480–493,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2006.10.055.
[131] C. Gómez-Navarro, D.E. Pataki, E.R. Pardyjak, D.R. Bowling, Effects of vegetation
on the spatial and temporal variation of microclimate in the urbanized Salt Lake
Valley, Agric. For. Meteorol. 296 (2021) 108211, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
agrformet.2020.108211.
[132] S. Permpituck, P. Namprakai, The energy consumption performance of roof lawn
gardens in Thailand, Renew. Energy 40 (2012) 98–103, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.renene.2011.09.023.
[133] W.N. Hien, S.K. Jusuf, A.A.L. Win, H.K. Thu, T.S. Negara, W. Xuchao,
Environmental study of the impact of greenery in an institutional campus in the
tropics, Build. Environ. 42 (2007) 2949–2970, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
buildenv.2006.06.004.
[134] T.A.N.T. Perera, G.Y. Jayasinghe, R.U. Halwatura, H.T. Rupasinghe, Modelling of
vertical greenery system with selected tropical plants in urban context to appraise
plant thermal performance, Ecol. Indicat. 128 (2021) 107816, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107816.
[135] W. Yang, Y. Lin, C.Q. Li, Effects of landscape design on urban microclimate and
thermal comfort in tropical climate, Adv. Meteorol. (2018) 2809649, https://doi.
org/10.1155/2018/2809649.
[136] S. Chatterjee, A. Khan, A. Dinda, et al., Simulating micro-scale thermal
interactions in different building environments for mitigating urban heat islands,
Sci. Total Environ. 663 (2019) 610–631, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
scitotenv.2019.01.299.
[137] A. Ghaffarianhoseini, U. Berardi, A. Ghaffarianhoseini, Thermal performance
characteristics of unshaded courtyards in hot and humid climates, Build. Environ.
87 (2015) 154–168, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2015.02.001.
[138] R. Sun, L. Chen, How can urban water bodies be designed for climate adaptation?
Landsc. Urban Plann. 105 (2012) 27–33, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
landurbplan.2011.11.018.
[139] G. Steeneveld, S. Koopmans, B. Heusinkveld, N. Theeuwes, Refreshing the role of
open water surfaces on mitigating the maximum urban heat island effect, Landsc.
Urban Plann. 121 (2014) 92–96, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
landurbplan.2013.09.001.
[140] E. Hathway, S. Sharples, The interaction of rivers and urban form in mitigating
the urban heat island effect: a UK case study, Build. Environ. 58 (2012) 14–22,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2012.06.013.
[141] R. Emmanuel, Book: an Urban Approach to Climate Sensitive Design: Strategies
for the Tropics, Taylor & Francis, 2005, https://doi.org/10.4324/
9780203414644.
[142] H. Ong, T. Mahlia, H. Masjuki, A review on energy scenario and sustainable
energy in Malaysia, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 15 (2011) 639–647, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.rser.2010.09.043.
[143] G. Manteghi, S.M. Shukri, H. Lamit, Street geometry and river width as design
factors to improve thermal comfort in Melaka City, J. Adv. Res. Fluid Mech.
Therm. Sci. 58 (1) (2019) 15–22.
[144] A.F.G. Jacobs, T.H. Jetten, D.C. Lucassen, B.G. Heusinkveld, J.P. Nieveen, Diurnal
temperature fluctuations in a natural shallow water body, Agric. For. Meteorol.
88 (1997) 269–277, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1923(97)00039-7.
[145] C. Jacobs, L. Klok, M. Bruse, J. Cortesão, S. Lenzholzer, J. Kluck, Are urban water
bodies really cooling? Urban Clim. 32 (2020) 100607, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
uclim.2020.100607 1-002.
U.K. Priya and R. Senthil
[146] D. Lai, W. Liu, T. Gan, K. Liu, Q. Chen, A review of mitigating strategies to
improve the thermal environment and thermal comfort in urban outdoor spaces,
Sci. Total Environ. 661 (2019) 337–353, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
scitotenv.2019.01.062.
[147] Y. Febrita, S.N.N. Ekasiwi, I.G. N Antaryama, Urban river landscape factors
impact on urban microclimate in tropical region, IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ.
Sci. 764 (2021), 012032, https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/764/1/012032.
[148] W.N. Hien, C. Tan, A. Nindyani, S. Jusuf, E. Tan, Influence of water bodies on
outdoor air temperature in hot and humid climate, in: Proceedings of
International Conference on Sustainable Design and Construction (ICSDC 2011),
Kansas City, MO, USA, March 2011, https://doi.org/10.1061/41204(426)11.
[149] G. Manteghi, T. Mostofa, Z. Hanafi, Microclimate field measurements in Melaka
waterbodies, Int. J. Eng. Technol. 7 (2018) 543–547, https://doi.org/10.14419/
ijet.v7i4.28.24745.
[150] K.I. Morrisa, A. Chan, M.C. Ooi, M.Y. Oozeer, Y.A. Abakr, K.J.K. Morris, Effect of
vegetation and waterbody on the garden city concept: an evaluation study using a
newly developed city, Putrajaya, Malaysia, Comput, Environ. Urban Syst. 58
(2016) 39–51, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2016.03.005.
[151] A.M. Qahtan, N. Keumala, S.P. Rao, Experimental determination of thermal
performance of glazed façades with water film, under direct solar radiation in the
tropics, Build. Environ. 46 (2011) 2238–2246, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
buildenv.2011.05.001.
[152] I. Wong, A.N. Baldwin, Investigating the potential of applying vertical green walls
to high-rise residential buildings for energy-saving in sub-tropical region, Build.
Environ. 97 (2016) 34–39, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2015.11.028.
[153] K. Perini, M. Ottelé, E.M. Haas, R. Raiteri, Greening the building envelope, facade
greening and living wall systems, Open J. Ecol. 1 (2011) 1–8, https://doi.org/
10.4236/oje.2011.11001.
[154] A.U.K. Imam, U.K. Banerjee, Urbanisation and greening of Indian cities: problems,
practices, and policies, Ambio 45 (2016) 442–457, https://doi.org/10.1007/
s13280-015-0763-4.
[155] M. Radhakrishnan, I. Kenzhegulova, M.G. Eloffy, W.A. Ibrahim, C. Zevenbergen,
A. Pathirana, Development of context specific sustainability criteria for selection
of plant species for green urban infrastructure: the case of Singapore, Sustain.
Prod. Consum. 20 (2019) 316–325, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2019.08.004.
[156] S.Y. Chan, C.K. Chau, On the study of the effects of microclimate and park and
surrounding building configuration on thermal comfort in urban parks, Sustain.
Cities Soc. 64 (2021) 102512, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102512.
[157] N. Meili, G. Manoli, P. Burlando, et al., Tree effects on urban microclimate:
diurnal, seasonal, and climatic temperature differences explained by separating
radiation, evapotranspiration, and roughness effects, Urban For. Urban Gree. 58
(2021) 126970, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126970.
20
Building and Environment 205 (2021) 108190
[158] V.R.S. Cheela, M. John, W. Biswas, P. Sarker, Combating urban heat island
effect—a review of reflective pavements and tree shading strategies, Buildings 11
(2021) 93, https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings11030093.
[159] P. Li, Z.-H. Wang, Environmental co-benefits of urban greening for mitigating
heat and carbon emissions, J. Environ. Manag. 293 (2021) 112963, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112963.
[160] M. Gräf, M. Immitzer, P. Hietz, R. Stangl, Water-stressed plants do not cool: leaf
surface temperature of living wall plants under drought stress, Sustainability 13
(7) (2021) 3910, https://doi.org/10.3390/su13073910.
[161] R. Sultana, Z. Ahmed, M.A. Hossain, B.A. Begum, Impact of green roof on human
comfort level and carbon sequestration: a microclimatic and comparative
assessment in Dhaka City, Bangladesh, Urban Clim. 38 (2021) 100878, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2021.100878.
[162] D. Narumi, R. Levinson, Y. Shimoda, Effect of urban heat island and global
warming countermeasures on heat release and carbon dioxide emissions from a
detached house, Atmosphere 12 (5) (2021), https://doi.org/10.3390/
atmos12050572.
[163] L.W. Chew, X. Liu, X. Li, L.K. Norford, Interaction between heat wave and urban
heat island: a case study in a tropical coastal city, Singapore, Atmos. Res. 247
(2021), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2020.105134.
[164] M. Detommaso, A. Gagliano, L. Marletta, F. Nocera, Sustainable urban greening
and cooling strategies for thermal comfort at pedestrian level, Sustainability 13
(6) (2021), https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063138.
[165] M. Lehnert, M. Brabec, M. Jurek, V. Tokar, J. Geletič, The role of blue and green
infrastructure in thermal sensation in public urban areas: a case study of summer
days in four Czech cities, Sustain. Cities Soc. 66 (2021), https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.scs.2020.102683.
[166] N. Nazarian, S. Liu, M. Kohler, J.K.W. Lee, C. Miller C, et al., Project coolbit: can
your watch predict heat stress and thermal comfort sensation? Environ. Res. Lett.
16 (3) (2021) https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abd130.
[167] T. Semeraro, A. Scarano, R. Buccolieri, A. Santino, E. Aarrevaara, Planning of
urban green spaces: an ecological perspective on human benefits, Land 10 (2)
(2021) 1–26, https://doi.org/10.3390/land10020105.
[168] N.H. Wong, C.L. Tan, D.D. Kolokotsa, H. Takebayashi, Greenery as a mitigation
and adaptation strategy to urban heat, Nat. Rev. Earth Environ. 2 (3) (2021)
166–181, https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-020-00129-5.
[169] C. Wang, Z. Wang, Y. Ryu, A single-layer urban canopy model with transmissive
radiation exchange between trees and street canyons, Build. Environ. 191 (2021)
107593, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2021.107593.
[170] N. Aghamohammadi, C.S. Fong, M.H.M. Idrus, L. Ramakreshnan, N.M. Sulaiman,
Environmental heat-related health symptoms among community in a tropical
city, Sci. Total Environ. 782 (2021) 146611, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
scitotenv.2021.146611.