A comparative analysis of space efficiency in skyscrapers: Case studies from the Middle East, Asia, and North America

Özlem Nur Aslantamer and Hüseyin Emre Ilgın

Journal of Design for Resilience in Architecture and Planning, 2025, vol. 6, issue 1, 01-19

Abstract: This study conducts a critical comparative analysis of spatial efficiency in supertall buildings across three major geographic contexts: the Middle East, Asia, and North America. Through the examination of selected case studies representative of each region, the research investigates the interplay between architectural form, structural typology, and the distribution of usable floor area within vertical structures. The findings reveal significant regional variations in spatial efficiency metrics and core-to-GFA (gross floor area) proportions. In the Asian context, towers predominantly adopt a tapered morphological strategy combined with composite structural systems, resulting in an average spatial efficiency of approximately 68%, with vertical service cores occupying nearly 30% of the GFA. Conversely, Middle Eastern high-rises, typically defined by prismatic massing and monolithic concrete structures, demonstrate a higher spatial efficiency—averaging 76%—with a core-to-GFA ratio of around 21%. North American skyscrapers, frequently employing prismatic or setback configurations alongside reinforced concrete systems, exhibit comparable efficiency rates, with an average of 76% and a similarly proportioned core area. Despite these regional divergences, the analysis identifies a consistent inverse correlation between building height and spatial efficiency, underscoring the technical and spatial challenges associated with height-induced inefficiencies in high-rise design. By elucidating these interregional patterns, the study offers valuable insights into the optimization of vertical spatial organization, contributing to the evolving discourse on high-rise architecture and urban densification.

Keywords: Middle East; Asia; North America; Skyscraper; space efficiency; comparison (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://drarch.org/index.php/drarch/article/view/224 Abstract page (text/html)
https://drarch.org/index.php/drarch/article/download/224/167 Full text (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:etk:drarch:v:6:y:2025:i:1:id:224

DOI: 10.47818/DRArch.2025.v6i1154

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journal of Design for Resilience in Architecture and Planning from Mehmet Topcu
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Dr. Havva Alkan Bala, Çukurova University Faculty of Architecture (Çukurova University Faculty of Communication 3rd floor) Saricam / Adana, Türkiye ().