Abstract
The building sector uses 40% of global energy and produces 36% of global CO₂ emissions, which demands the immediate adoption of sustainable construction materials. This systematic review integrates Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) with climate-zone-specific performance evaluation of sustainable building materials, comparing Autoclaved Aerated Concrete (AAC), Hempcrete, Structural Insulated Panels (SIPs) and Vacuum Insulated Panels (VIPs) across hot-arid, cold-temperate, and hot-humid climates. Following PRISMA guidelines, 22 high-quality studies (2020-2024) were analyzed for thermal performance, environmental impact, economic viability, and implementation feasibility. The research shows AAC achieved 48.3% energy reduction (95% CI: 42.1-54.5%) in hot-arid climates versus 32.7% (95% CI: 27.3-38.1%) in cold-temperate zones—a 48% performance advantage in hot climates. Hempcrete demonstrated carbon sequestration ranging from -165 to -85 kgCO₂e/m² with 94% variation across climates. SIPs reduced energy consumption by 30-40% in cold climates compared to 20-30% in hot-humid zones. VIPs provided exceptional insulation (λ = 0.004-0.008 W/mK) with 45-60% energy reduction in cold climates but faced 200-400% cost premiums. The analysis shows that implementation quality determines 26% of performance outcomes because proper workforce training and quality control practices remain essential. Climate-specific optimization is essential; no single material performs optimally across all zones. AAC offers the most versatile solution with 3–5-year payback periods in hot-arid climates. The systematic review combining MCDA with climate-zone-specific analysis and implementation quality assessment for sustainable building materials, establishing an evidence-based guidelines for choosing materials based on climate conditions for practitioners worldwide.