Library spaces vary greatly in terms of location, size, equipment, noise sources, and operating hours, underscoring the need for a comprehensive assessment of indoor environmental quality (IEQ). Despite this, few studies have simultaneously considered both objectively measured IEQ data and users’ subjective perceptions. This study addresses this research gap by integrating sensor-based objective measurements with survey-based subjective assessments to evaluate IEQ across multiple spaces within the Pao Yue-Kong Library in Hong Kong. Four key IEQ parameters were analyzed: thermal comfort, indoor air quality (IAQ), visual comfort, and acoustic comfort. Results indicated that thermal comfort and IAQ conditions were largely rated as “excellent” across spaces. However, notable differences emerged for visual and acoustic comfort. Additionally, varying user expectations contributed to differences in user satisfaction, even under similar objective conditions. These findings provide library facility managers with critical insights for informed decision-making, optimizing space utilization, and improving user satisfaction.
AdamGPontUMahdaviA (2014) Evaluation of thermal environment and indoor air quality in university libraries in Vienna. Advanced Materials Research899: 315–320.
2.
AflakiAEsfandiariMJarrahiA (2023) Multi-criteria evaluation of a library’s indoor environmental quality in the tropics. Buildings13(5): 1233.
3.
AkanmuWPNunayonSSEbosonUC (2021) Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) assessment of Nigerian University Libraries: A pilot study. Energy and Built Environment2(3): 302–314.
4.
AkimotoTTanabeSIYanaiT, et al. (2010) Thermal comfort and productivity - evaluation of workplace environment in a task conditioned office. Building and Environment45(1): 45–50.
5.
Al HorrYArifMKaushikA, et al. (2016) Occupant productivity and office indoor environment quality: A review of the literature. Building and Environment105: 369–389.
6.
AndrewsCWrightSERaskinH (2016) Library learning spaces: Investigating libraries and investing in student feedback. Journal of Library Administration56(6): 647–672.
7.
AsherAD (2017) Space use in the commons: Evaluating a flexible library environment. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice12(2): 68–89.
8.
ASHRAE (2010) Thermal environmental conditions for human occupancy. ASHRAE Standard, no. STANDARD 55, pp. 1–44.
9.
BabaFMHaj HusseinMSalehS, et al. (2023) Mitigating undercooling and overheating risk in existing desert schools under current and future climate using validated building simulation model. Building and Environment245: 110871.
10.
BaiYJinH (2023) Effects of visual, thermal, and acoustic comfort on the psychological restoration of the older people in a severe cold city. Building and Environment239: 110402.
11.
BertoRTintinagliaFRosatoP (2023) How much is the indoor comfort of a residential building worth? A discrete choice experiment. Building and Environment245: 110911.
12.
ChangYZhangXSongG, et al. (2023) Evaluation of airborne transmission risk in university towns based on IEQ surveys. Energy and Built Environment4(5): 493–505.
13.
ChaSHKimTW (2020) The role of space attributes in space-choice behaviour and satisfaction in an academic library. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science52(2): 399–409.
14.
ChoeYShinJSParkJ, et al. (2022) Inadequacy of air purifier for indoor air quality improvement in classrooms without external ventilation. Building and Environment207: 108450.
15.
CIBSE (2012) SLL Code for Lighting (2012). The Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers (CIBSE).
16.
CIE (1995) Discomfort glare in interior lighting. International Commission on Illumination (CIE), 117-1995 (Division 3).
17.
de DearR (2004) Thermal comfort in practice. Indoor Air14(s7): 32–39.
18.
de DearRJAuliciemsA (1985) Thermal neutrality and acceptability in six Australian field studies. In: FangerPO (ed.) Clima 2000. 4 WS Kongres-VVS Messe, pp.103–108.
19.
DengMWangXMenassaCC (2021) Measurement and prediction of work engagement under different indoor lighting conditions using physiological sensing. Building and Environment203: 108098.
20.
ElbayoumiMRamliNAYusofNFFM, et al. (2015) Seasonal variation in schools’ indoor air environments and health symptoms among students in an eastern Mediterranean climate. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal21(1): 184–204.
21.
EPD (1997) Technical memorandum for the assessment of noise from places other than domestic premises, public places or construction sites. Environmental Protection Department, The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.
FranksJEAsherDC (2014) Noise management in twenty-First Century libraries: Case studies of four U.S. academic institutions. New Review of Academic Librarianship20(3): 320–331. DOI: 10.1080/13614533.2014.891528
24.
FultonRD (1991) A conceptual model for understanding the physical attributes of learning environments. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education1991(50): 13–22. DOI: 10.1002/ace.36719915004
25.
GalasiuADVeitchJA (2006) Occupant preferences and satisfaction with the luminous environment and control systems in Daylit Offices: A literature review. Energy and Buildings38(7): 728–742.
26.
GüneşGYalçinNÇolaklarH (2022) Investigation of indoor air quality in university libraries in terms of gaseous and particulate pollutants in Bartin, Turkey. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment194(3): 200.
27.
GuptaRHowardAZahiriS (2020) Defining the link between indoor environment and workplace productivity in a modern UK office building. Architectural Science Review63(3-4): 248–261.
28.
HanggaAPutriRDMPratamaD, et al. (2022) Assessment of lighting system in library room of E11 building, Universitas Negeri Semarang. IOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental Science969(1): 012032.
29.
HassanainMA (2010) Analysis of factors influencing office workplace planning and design in corporate facilities. Journal of Building Appraisal6(4): 183–197.
HumphreysMA (2005) Quantifying occupant comfort: Are combined indices of the indoor environment practicable?Building Research & Information33(4): 317–325.
32.
IAQ Management Group (2019) Guidance Notes for the Management of Indoor Air Quality in Offices and Public Places. The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) Management Group (pp. 1–73).
33.
JaworskaNBlierPFuseeW, et al. (2012) Alpha power, alpha asymmetry and anterior cingulate cortex activity in depressed males and females. Journal of Psychiatric Research46(11): 1483–1491.
34.
JungC-CWuP-CTsengC-H, et al. (2015) Indoor air quality varies with ventilation types and working areas in hospitals. Building and Environment85: 190–195.
35.
LeechJANelsonWCBurnettRT, et al. (2002) It’s about time: A comparison of Canadian and American time–activity patterns. Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology12(6): 427–432.
36.
LeeJKimTWLeeC, et al. (2022) Integrated approach to evaluating the effect of indoor CO2 concentration on human cognitive performance and neural responses in office environment. Journal of Management in Engineering38(1): 04021085.
37.
LouHOuD (2019) A comparative field study of indoor environmental quality in two types of open-plan offices: Open-plan administrative offices and open-plan research offices. Building and Environment148: 394–404.
38.
MahyuddinNLawJB (2019) Indoor Environmental Quality Assessment in a learning space: University of Malaya’s Main Library. Journal of Surveying, Construction and Property10(1): 1–15.
39.
MannaDDe SarkarT (2023) Achieving acoustic comfort in the library: a sound masking initiative. Library Hi Tech News. DOI: 10.1108/LHTN-06-2023-0110
40.
MuiKWWongLT (2006) A method of assessing the acceptability of noise levels in air-conditioned offices. Building Services Engineering Research and Technology27(3): 249–254.
41.
NtuiAI (2009) Noise sources and levels at the university of calabar library, Calabar, Nigeria. African Journal of Library, Archives and Information Science19(1): 53–63.
42.
OhDKimJKimH, et al. (2023) Analyzing the impact of indoor environmental quality on physiological responses and work performance: Implications for IEQ control strategies. Building and Environment244: 110845.
43.
PengYAntanuriNLauSK, et al. (2023) Experimental assessment of thermal and acoustics interactions on occupant comfort in mixed-mode buildings. Building and Environment238: 110342.
44.
ReinhartCF (2002) Effects of interior design on the daylight availability in open plan offices. In: Proc. ACEEE Summer Study Energy Effic. Build, pp.3.309–3.322.
45.
RoskamsMJHaynesBP (2020) Testing the relationship between objective indoor environment quality and subjective experiences of comfort. Building Research & Information49(4): 387–398.
46.
SerghidesDKChatzinikolaCKKatafygiotouMC (2015) Comparative studies of the occupants’ behaviour in a university building during winter and Summer time. International Journal of Sustainable Energy34(8): 528–551.
47.
ShinHKangMMunSH, et al. (2021) A study on changes in occupants’ thermal sensation owing to CO₂ concentration using PMV and TSV. Building and Environment187: 107413.
48.
ShumCAlipouriYZhongL (2022) Examination of human interaction on indoor environmental quality variables: A case study of libraries at the University of Alberta. Building and Environment207: 108476.
SuttisinthongNSeewiroteBNgaopitakkulA, et al. (2014) Feasibility study and impact of energy consumption reduction using T5 fluorescent lamp in building. In: Proceedings of 2014 International conference on intelligent green building and smart grid, IGBSG 2014.
52.
SuYLiZMengQ, et al. (2023) Simulation and optimization of thermal comfort in residential areas based on outdoor morphological parameters. Building and Environment245: 110837.
53.
TangTZhuYZhouX, et al. (2022) Investigation of the effects of face masks on thermal comfort in Guangzhou, China. Building and Environment214: 108932.
54.
ToftumJJørgensenASFangerPO (1998) Upper limits for indoor air humidity to avoid uncomfortably humid skin. Energy and Buildings28(1): 1–13.
55.
TorrianiGLambertiGSalvadoriG, et al. (2023) Thermal comfort and adaptive capacities: Differences among students at various school stages. Building and Environment237: 110340.
56.
TsengF-YChaoC-JFengW-Y, et al. (2010) Assessment of human color discrimination based on illuminant color, ambient illumination and screen background color for visual display terminal workers. Industrial Health48(4): 438–446.
57.
VischerJC (2005) Space Meets Status: Designing Workplace Performance. Routledge.
58.
WooJRajagopalanPFrancisM, et al. (2021) An indoor environmental quality assessment of office spaces at an urban Australian University. Building Research & Information49(8): 842–858.
59.
XiaoJAlettaF (2016) A soundscape approach to exploring design strategies for acoustic comfort in modern public libraries: A case study of the Library of Birmingham. Noise Mapping3(1): 264–273. DOI: 10.1515/noise-2016-0018
60.
YoshidaYYamamotoY (2003) Color management of liquid crystal display placed under light environment. Electronics and Communications in Japan86(7): 1–14.
61.
YunSLicinaD (2023) Optimal sensor placement for personal inhalation exposure detection in static and dynamic office environments. Building and Environment241: 110459.
62.
WargockiP (2000) The effects of outdoor air supply rate in an office on perceived air quality, sick building syndrome (SBS) symptoms and productivity. Indoor Air10(4): 222–236.
63.
WargockiPLagercrantzLWittersehT, et al. (2002) Subjective perceptions, symptom intensity and performance: A comparison of two independent studies, both changing similarly the pollution load in an office. Indoor Air12(2): 74–80.
